Visual Arguments

This image is a typical visual argument from alcohol companies. There is a bottle of vodka pouring over a portion of a dark city, making the part that touches the vodka bright, exciting, and fun. It implies that by adding vodka to any sort of outing, party, etc., the event will instantly be one of the best things one has ever experienced.

I believe that the way this argument is presented is extremely effective. While some of us, including myself, are not drinkers and simply ignore ads like these, others appreciate the idea that the product implies and many of the latter go out and try the product. It is obviously a blanket statement, and some of these people will find that the statement is not true. However, many will, and it is because of statements like this that they expect to absolutely love the product.

The Softest TP in the World?

The Cottonelle Puppy. We have all seen him on television. There is hardly a cuter actor on the tube than this. And this is where one can find the emotional appeal: no one can resist an adorable puppy, sleeping comfortably in the cutest position on a roll of toilet paper. This image needs no explanation—it makes a strong argument about the softness of Cottonelle standing by itself.

The persuasion? I want to find out if it’s really that soft!

Wave that Confederate Flag!

Ever since it’s early establishment, freedom of speech has been a touchy subject. While everyone enjoys the right to be able to speak freely, there are terms of acceptance that one must agree to. In general, if I have the right to speak my mind, then so does everybody and their mother. Granted, there are forms of free speech that one does not have to accept. This form, called hate speech, is discussed in an article by Derek Bok.

I agree with Bok in his essay. I believe that since we have had the right of free speech for over 200 years, there will be no suppressing it now—especially in a world that is becoming more selfishly literal. For example, consider what it would be like to approach the record companies with a proposition: censor the language the musicians use, or Congress will either slap a huge fine on the company or simply shut it down based on a new establishment of limitations on free speech. The record company, not to mention the American public, would go crazy. Inevitably, they would go back to the Anti-federalist view and plead the first.

I am not saying that hate speech is okay. By all means, I am like any other American in believing that hate speech should be avoided at all times. Hate speech, in my opinion, goes beyond the freedom of speech. Not only does it infringe upon the right of freedom of religion, many times it also simply attacks a person for being who or what they (which they consequently cannot change). To quote the writer, “The fact that free speech is protected by the First Amendment does not necessarily mean that it is right, proper, or civil.”

As Bok said in his essay, perhaps the better way of diffusing hate speech on a college campus is to simply ignore it. He makes a good point in saying that once prohibitions are made known, many will start to test the limits of the prohibition. After all, censorship is still coming from a human-to-human perspective. Bok reasons that if we do not give attention to the many forms of hate speech, then to cause a ruckus will be less desirable. However, I think that what he states after this is also true: “[officials and faculty members] should seek to educate and persuade” students on living humanely in a society based on mutual respect.

While it is true that this is a free country, and while we do have the right to free speech, one cannot simply say what is on their mind at any moment in time. This goes back to our civil duty as respectful citizens. If we walked around yakking about whatever we wanted, we would not make many friends!

Where I have experienced hate speech the most is through religion, mine and the religion of others. I am Christian, and I am not simply a church-going, pray-before-meals one. While I was researching information on my paper topic—Creationism—I found many political cartoons boasting about evolution, and degrading Creationism. This was not purposefully planned to be hate speech, but it is in the way that it is offensive to myself and others who believe in Creationism.

Thus there are solutions to the hate speech/free speech conflict. The problem is implicating them in everyday life.

ASP Round 2

Scott, Eugenie C. “Antievolution and creationism in the United States.” Annual View of Anthropology 26.1 (1997): 263. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 28 October 2009.
This article is about how the argument started as a fight between evolutionism and creationism. In recent years, the article says that there has been a new addition to the argument: Intelligent Design. The article discusses people who are for creationism and Intelligent Design, and what they have been doing to move evolution out of the way.

Windsor, Donald A. “Creationism is a dumbing-down of God.” Perspectives in Biology & Medicine 42.2 (1999): 288. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 28 October 2009.
The refute against my argument is an article about the similar view of many evolutionists. The writer gives all the generally rebuttals to the argument for creationism, using scientific evidence as usual. Overall, the writer simply wants to imply that while creationists believe the world was created by God, the idea of creationism is one that makes God seem dumb.

Zuidema, Henry P. “Less Evolution, More Creationism in Textbooks.” Educational Leadership 39.3 (December 1981): 217-218. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 28 October 2009.
This article analyzed the surprising change of science textbooks. It discusses the fact that there is more creationism now published, and that these publishers are simply catering to creationists to make their living. The article also shows the reactions of the schools to this change, called creation science. The writer also expands on the specifics of the creation science movement.

Image Quest

This photo is in agreement with my view on creationism. I was drawn to it because of its artistic attributes: I imagine Intelligent Design as something creative and fantastic, not simply the sudden establishment of plants, animals, and people.








The second photo I found is a different kind of argument. Everyone knows what a human heart looks like, but have you ever pondered the complicity of it? My theory is that the heart, with all of its valves, pumps, and intricacies, is a direct reference to Intelligent Design.











My third chosen photo is a depiction of the theories compared: in one, God is solid and absolute. In the other, man is gooey and indecisive. As I believe that evolution in its entirety is a theory simply created by man, this aids to my argument well in showing the messiness of man's theory.

Academic Search Premier

Cracraft, Joel. "The New Creationism and Its Threat to Science Literacy and Education." Bioscience 54.1 Jan. 2004: 3-4. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 21 Oct. 2009.
This article is about the conflicts Charles Darwin’s ideas present to the American people. The interesting aspect about this article is that the writer strives to inform people of Darwin’s religious beliefs. While his book sparked religious controversy, the writer of this article uses direct quotes to show that Darwin was not an atheist. On the contrary, he speaks of how the origins of species can go along with Creationism: the species change and adapt over time, but they were originally formed by a Creator. The writer of the article then continues on to speak of how Creationism sparked out of the debate over Darwinism, and how those beginnings have affected people throughout history up until the current time.

Dixon, Thomas. "America's Difficulty with Darwin." History Today 59.2 (2009): 22-28. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 21 Oct. 2009.
The second article I read is about the problems Creationism causes for new age science. The writer argues that Creationism gets in the way of science education and that with many people arguing for Intelligent Design Creationism (IDC), science cannot be correctly taught as science. He believes that IDC is “an antiscientific world view.” With this argument, he attacks Creationism by attempting to prove that while Creationists are trying to get their view taught in schools, it is pushing pure science out.

Moore, Randy. "The revival of Creationism in the United States." Journal of Biological Education 35.1 (2000): 17-17. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. 21 Oct. 2009.
The third article is about the comeback Creationism is making. He begins by explaining Creationism and its historical beginnings, and continues to explain when exactly Creationism lost popularity (Darwinism and the Scopes trial is included in this). To endorse his reasoning that Creationism will not go away, he points out all of things that have happened and happen currently in schools, i.e. biology teachers avoiding in-depth conversations about evolution so as not to spark controversy. He also uses the results of many polls about how many Americans believe in Creationism, what percentage of the Republican party believes in it, and the belief of science teachers that evolution is or is not central to biology.

An Argument for...

Normally I am a very non-confrontational person. I tend to stay away from topics that people become heated and argue over constantly. I decided, for my topic, to go out on a limb and choose a topic that I—as well as many other people on both sides of the argument—feel strongly about. I chose the argument for Creationism.

• Do you agree with Creationism?
• Based on hard natural evidence, do you believe in the existence of a Creator?
• Based on hard scientific evidence, do you agree with Creationism?
• Do apologetics have any sway towards or against Creationism?

Snapshots

1. This is the reason that a good percentage of Americans are obese. Using the information from this graph, we can say that 69.2% of Americans eat at a fast food restaurant every week, at least once. This is not simply a slight majority. The eating habits of Americans based on this pie graph show that many Americans are too busy to consider eating more healthily by packing their lunch.

2. Many American families are doing something right. From the information, one can see that 97% of people eat no more than three times at a fast food restaurant per week. One-third of these people do not eat out at all during the week. The other two-thirds eat out only once, twice, or occasionally three times a week.

3. Some Americans eat at fast food restaurants more than half of the days of every week. The graph shows that 69.2% of Americans eat out up to 5 times a week. If one considers a 5-day work week, many of these people are eating out every day or nearly every day. Again the eating habits show that people are too busy to eat well-balanced meals at regular intervals.

Hard Evidence

“The bigger they are, the harder they fall.” This is not an example of hard evidence. It is a statement that could be applied after using hard evidence to prove it to be correct. With this statement the reader must assume too much.

Drunk drivers are involved in more than 50 percent of traffic deaths. This is not hard evidence because it uses statistics from an unnamed source. Again it is useful only if the reader assumes basics: that the statement is from a reliable source that conducted a study and received these results.

DNA tests of skin found under the victim’s fingernails suggest that the defendant was responsible for the assault. It is hard to argue with DNA: DNA almost always represents hard evidence. Retrieving and analyzing DNA is an accepted practice to provide solid evidence for a case.

Polls suggest that a large majority of Americans favor a constitutional amendment to ban flag burning. This statement could be hard evidence, provided that the polls were shown to be relevant. The polls would also have to be legitimate.

A psychologist testified that teenage violence could not be blamed on computer games. This statement raises many questions. The title psychologist does not make the evidence concrete because the statement does not specify which psychologist.

Honey attracts more flies than vinegar. This statement suggests that a study or observation has been done. However, the statement by itself is not an example of hard evidence. It is not nearly specific enough.

History proves that cutting tax rates increases government revenues because people work harder when they can keep more of what they earn. This is hard evidence. The statement uses historical reference, which is generally good evidence for any claim. The last part is a little misleading, because it sounds like opinion; it’s fine if it’s historical.

“We have nothing to fear but fear itself.” A cliché is not hard evidence in my opinion. Like I’ve said previously for some of the other statements, it is too general and makes too many questions. The statement leaves for every person to make an opinion of their own. In this case, the facts can’t coincide with all the opinions.

Air bags ought to be removed from vehicles because they can kill young children and small-framed adults. This could be hard evidence, if the correct statistics were provided. The statement could be proved but would also have significant evidence against it.

Obama and his Prize

With the announcements of the winners of the Nobel Peace Prize recently, many people in the United States have one thought on their mind: Why did President Obama receive a Nobel?? With good reason, I might add. As I have nothing against Obama, I think it is rather ridiculous that he would win a Nobel after having been in office for a couple weeks at the time. As I was researching the op-eds for The Washington Post, I found an article all about this topic: An Unconstitutional Nobel by Ronald D. Rotunda and J. Peter Pham.

The writers clearly lay out the facts. A president receiving a Nobel is unconstitutional. I would not have necessarily believed this on hearing the phrase, but the evidence is concrete. Rotunda and Pham including a quote from the Constitution in their article, stating, “"And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince or foreign State."

Because of the newness of this opinion piece in the news, I only found one opposition article on the Opposing Viewpoints Research Center. (In searching for future articles for arguments of fact, however, I will make sure to pick a topic that has many viewpoints.) This article I found, called President of Planet Earth, is extremely pro-Obama. In his byline, writer Howard Fineman describes his article as “why Obama’s Nobel was inevitable.” He continues to explain all the things Obama has done during and well before his presidency that put him in the ranks for the prize.

Although I was not overly swayed by the opposing article, I found reinforcements to my idea that I can support President Obama while still being a Republican. The opposing article did not have any “concrete evidence” like the first article did, but it was persuasive in its own way. I also came upon support of my beliefs: everyone has different opinions about everything.

The Walls have Eyes

I recently read a book called 1984, by George Orwell. The book was all about Orwell’s idea of what the future will be like, with dingy prospects and an overly controlling government called the “Party.” Through his main character, Winston, he emphasizes the fact that the “Party” is always watching its citizens: the posters have eyes; the telescreens are watching and monitoring from anywhere and everywhere. When I watched the YouTube video showing you instance of police brutality, I thought of Orwell’s book and our modern ideas of surveillance.

We should be thankful that our government is not so controlling as to place watchful eyes even in our homes. But I think we’re coming close to having even our personal space invaded. There are hardly any public places where you can go that does not have some sort of surveillance camera. Even if you are walking outside in a city, you could be picked up by a camera at a traffic light or outside of a store.

I once heard that a person is caught on camera approximately eighty-three times a day. Eighty-three is a big number for those of us who live at home! I do not know about the rest of you, but I certainly cannot come up with eighty-three places I could be caught on surveillance a day.

Granted, I am not totally against surveillance. As stated in the commentary of the police brutality YouTube video, the surveillance of one officer’s act cost him punishment for this obscenity. If you agree as I do with James Madison that the human race is not held by civic virtue, then surveillance is a needed crime-stopper. For that it is an invention of genius. Surveillance is an aid to those individuals or companies who have been wronged unduly. In our increasingly crime-riddled world, the camera fits well.

Perhaps I am slightly paranoid, as was George Orwell. I see my personal space shrinking, along with everyone else’s personal space. I find myself asking a similar question Orwell’s Winston asked himself while deciding whether or not to go out on a limb of betrayal: how much of my personal freedom am I willing to give up to be protected by the government’s surveillance techniques?

An Op-Ed about...Hitler?

It is natural for humans to be intrigued by dark topics. Why else would people watch horror movies, research articles about Charles Manson, and read books about some of history’s massacres? In my case, my favorite dark and twisty subject to study is Adolf Hitler. (Don’t get me wrong, I am not a fan—I am simply a curious person.) So when I found a New York Times article arguing the absolutes of Stalin actually storing Hitler’s body in Moscow, I knew that I had found my article to research.

I am one of those people that go to the AOL homepage every day and watch the newsfeed, picking out articles that sound interesting. Most of the articles I select are questioning arguments made by others. The article I found on the NYT website, called Hitler’s Jaws of Death, falls into this category. These types of articles interest me greatly.

While I am not Jewish, nor overwhelmingly German, this article relates to my life in only one way: history is one of my favorite subjects to study, and this article is all about the history of the aftermath of WWII. The impact that Hitler made has had rippling effects, effects that draw people like me to study them today.

These effects are also widely researchable. There is a vast amount of information about Hitler, his death, and his body because of the importance of the Holocaust to many people. Material about all of this would thus be extremely easy to find.

To some people this would obviously seem like a futile attempt at researching a mum topic. It is obvious that this topic is not important in the way of stopping future dictators. But to people like myself, however, it would be the production of another stint of research about one of our favorite dark topics to study.

Everyone likes to Argue (response to #1 on page 200)

Hurricanes are increasing in number and ferocity. This claim is not worth explaining in my opinion. The simple fact that the United States has not had a significant hurricane since Hurricane Katrina in 2005 would prove this argument to be questionable already. Where we live also is a factor—not many college students are worrying about hurricanes in northeast Indiana.

Many people die annually of cancer. Perhaps if this claim was about the causes of cancer then it would be more important to a majority of college students, but it is too simple of a statement to need arguing. Based on what we already know about cancer, not many people would disagree that many people die from it every year.

Fewer people would die of heart disease each year if more of them paid attention to their diets. This is a good argument to present. Rather than just stating that people die of heart disease, as in the last statement about cancer, this statement presents a way to act on the argument. It also could provide very important facts about a healthy diet that not many people know.

Japan might have come to terms more readily in 1945 if the Allies had not demanded unconditional surrender. This would probably be an argument important to the World War 2 buff rather than the average college student. It is an interesting historical debate, but only for people interested in the topic.

Boys would do better in school if there were more men teaching in elementary and secondary classrooms. Because of its relevance to many of my peers, this is a “claim worth arguing.” Not only is this argument relevant because of the many people majoring in education, but because of the males that have made it to college.

The ever-increasing number of minorities in higher education is evidence that racial problems have just about ended in the United States. This claim is extremely important to many people in colleges. One reason is that it deals with “higher education.” A second reason is that many people on college campuses are in a racial minority.

There are not enough high-paying jobs for college graduates these days. This claim is another that is extremely relevant to college students. I can speak for myself when I say that I want to know what kinds of high-paying jobs will be available to me when I graduate!

Hydrogen may never be a viable alternative to fossil fuels because it takes too much energy to change hydrogen into a useable form. Though it should be important because it deals with the kinds of problems our world will face when we are out of college, not many current college students would care about this claim. It is an issue that seems too far out of touch with our lives and problems.

Only one of the first forty-three presidents of the United States was Catholic. This is not a broad enough topic to interest and be important to the majority of college students. While many are admittedly Catholic, there is not necessarily an overwhelming Catholic population. There are also probably not enough students that would care whether or not their president had the same faith as them.

Political activists have grossly exaggerated the effects of the USA Patriot Act on free expression. Free expression is important to people of all age groups, but especially to college students. In a time where we are finally getting to have our own voice about things, a claim such as this would be important to research. Most college students want to know the extent of their free expression.

Definition Criteria

“Graphic novels are serious literature.” This is simply a statement of the adult nature of graphic novels. Graphic novels are not meant for children to read, nor are they meant for younger teens either. Instead of defining serious literature in the terms of Hamlet, one can safely say that graphic novels are serious literature because they contain topics that are explicit or inappropriate for some readers.

“Burning a nation’s flag is a hate crime.” Hate crime is defined formally as “a crime, usually violent, motivated by prejudice or intolerance toward a member of a gender, racial, religious, or social group.” Since a nation could be considered a social group, burning their flag would be categorically defined as a hate crime.

“The [Obamas] have become America’s royal family.” (I replaced “Bushes” with “Obamas” because of the appropriate context.) While America does not actually have a royal family, the President and his family are the closest to that. They are a family that nearly everyone in the nation respects, they are in the news constantly, and since Barack Obama is the president, he is a leader of the nation—just as a royal person is recognized as a head of a country.

“Matt Drudge and Larry Flynt are legitimate journalists.” Blogs are a new part of journalism. They are as informative as most news sites—they are opinionated, but so are editorials. Drudge and Flynt can be labeled as journalists because they post about issues that are seen in the news just as other news sites and newspapers do.

“Plagiarism can be an act of civil disobedience.” Plagiarism is by all means an immoral act. Using other peoples’ papers, etc., is frowned upon as stealing. It can be called civil disobedience because plagiarism can harmful to the public good.

"Pink Think"

When I was younger, I was continually sucked into the “pink think” attitude. I have an older sister, and she happens to be quite girly. If she announced that her favorite color was pink, I followed shortly with the statement that my favorite color was pink. I did not grow up with very many girls whose mothers did not dress them with little bows in their hair or did not let them take their Barbies to show and tell.

This is the way we’re raised. It’s called “pink think” by writer Lynn Peril. And I think it is a completely accurate way of labeling it. It starts when we are little, as I mentioned previously. It is not considered normal for a young girl to hate dresses, loathe bouncing pigtails with ribbons, and long to go outside and tumble around in the mud with her friends (who just happen to be all boys).

When girls grow older, they notice more examples of it in the television, as Peril points out. The “joys of housewifery” are displayed clearly on nearly all sitcoms. One can rarely find a television show with a mother or grandmother that is not either a stay-at-home mom, pregnant constantly, or always cooking or cleaning.

In my own life, I find things that make this statement true (although I am not nearly as girly of a person as I used to be): the places I work are nearly overrun by women. I work at a children’s toy store, and a chocolate shop. At the first, the only people who work there are women and gay men—other than my boyfriend, that is. Women are supposed to be more attracted to working with children than men are, apparently. At the second, the only men who work there do the “manly” jobs, such as running the big machines and working in the warehouse.

If this is not typecasting, I do not know what is. Women have grown up on the concept that we are to take certain roles and enjoy certain things. Granted, this is changing. But the idea is still there.

Through the textbook’s examples I have come up with another phrase that could define our world and how we relate to each other: “conformity think.” As I base my life on wishing to not settle into any stereotype, the world in general seems to enjoy placing people in stereotypes.

In fact, people are more comfortable this way. The way people gravitate towards other people with similar fashion style, music taste, and even ethnicity is astounding. Take my group of friends as an example. Though I am not racist, sexist, or opposed to associating with people who have different views on things, my closest friends are white girls who have all grown up in the Midwest, never listen to rap music, and are all very driven people when it comes to school and jobs. Thus I say that although America claims to be a very diverse nation, I believe that different people groups still have problems with integrating together.

Definition of Patriotism

Patriotism is a word that flies about, a word that generally has a lot of meanings. But patriotism is nothing more than pride in one’s identity that is associated with loyalty to one’s country. It does not mean that to be patriotic one must do acts of selflessness for the good of all, or that one must “cross the line,” as Peter Kierstin wrote in his article “How I Define Patriotism.”

One simply needs confidence in the fact that they are who they are, in part because they are American.

America = Superman?!

So much about the war has been circulating for such a long time. All the issues have been raised, many more than once. Numerous news videos and stories have been played on television and the Internet. With all of this going on since 2001, it is easy to forget that there even is a war—technically just an extremely large military operation—still happening.

At least it has been for me. I was fairly young when the terrorist attacks happened. I was only slightly older, and not really involved in anything but my own little teenage world, when there was talk of sending troops to Iraq. And even now, when the news stories about the goings-on in the Middle East have dwindled to the most recent terrorist bombings (but what else is new?!), the topic of the war is easily avoidable if one is not searching for it.

Along with my limited knowledge of the war, I developed a limitedly scant opinion of it a little while after the hubbub started: war is bad. Along the way I have developed my view slightly: we, as the most powerful nation in the world, do not have an obligation to all of the other countries to “save” them if they do not ask. We help, but we do not thrust our ideals upon them, and that is what I feel like we are doing—maybe we weren’t in the first few years, but we definitely are after 6+ years have passed.

The milblog fortified my thoughts of this. I do believe that there is a need for military, and I most certainly appreciate all of the people that choose to serve our country in that way. But my opinion is reinforced when I read that many of the people in the military do not think we should be involved in this war either. I was encouraged that, as I said in one of my responding posts to the milblog, all the people in the Middle East are not haunted by lives of “doom and gloom” constantly. However, having all those stations of troops is wasteful, when we could use our troops in other parts of the world.

America doesn’t always have to be the hero. We are powerful, and I believe we should be philanthropic enough to be helpful. But being helpful only goes so far.

"Why I Hate Britney"

Britney Spears: one of the most hunted by the paparazzi. A diva by all means, complete with a divorce record, children horror-stories, and attempted comebacks to popularity. Many have fallen from the fan cloud, and some, like myself and the writer of the article I chose to critique, opted to never be a part of the fan cloud at all.

I would give Ms. Williams an A-. The essay was well-developed. All of her points were descriptive, and her paragraphs were full of content. It wasn’t a wimpy 5-paragraph essay. She put a lot of thought and research into her topic. She also used purposefully-placed statistics, which helped aid to her side of the argument.

However, I was disturbed by a lot of the language she used. It came off as strong and almost standoffish. While it is good to be strong in your argument, words like “stripper” and “sleazy” turn the reader off. Perhaps that was the stance she was going for, but I felt that her vocabulary was very childish.

Criteria of Evaluation

I cannot deny: I have become a Project Runway junkie. I only have class Tuesday-Thursday, and so it is the perfect Thursday evening relaxation show. Because of my interest in the fashion industry, I have chosen to develop my criteria of evaluation on fashion designers.

As Heidi Klum says at the beginning of every episode, “In fashion, one day you’re in, and the next, you’re out.” This is a true statement—to be a good fashion designer, you must stay on top of your game, so to speak. The ideas should never stop flowing from a fashion designer. This is the first criterion: always have an idea waiting to happen. The fashion world is a dog-eat-dog place. One never knows when their new brilliant idea will be stolen, thus, one should be prepared with another new brilliant idea.

The next criterion is a simple one. Be able to create with your own hands. Do not expect to hire people to do your sewing, stitching, cutting, hemming, etc. Many of the designers that are voted off of Project Runway are told that their work was messy and amateur. As the saying goes, “If you want something done, do it yourself.” Doing one’s own handiwork also creates a plus in the finished product. If the designer completes the project him- or herself, the finished product is likely to be exactly what the designer intended originally.

A final criterion (although the criteria is certainly not limited to my list here) for fashion designers is the ability to think creatively and put themselves out on a limb. Again, this one nearly goes without saying. However, the runway is a harsh and critical place. The presentation of common items already found in stores is not well-received. To be a successful designer, one must present new and edgy ideas.

The second item I have chosen from the list is UN secretary generals. I am not a hugely political person, so I do not follow the goings-on of the UN. (I probably couldn’t name any secretary generals, either!) To research this topic, I would start out by going to encyclopedias or books on UN history. I would choose the most talked-about secretary generals, and then find other books (or internet sources) as to why they were in the news a lot. This would include if they were popular, what issues they stood for, and what acts they did as secretary general. This would help me formulate criteria of evaluation for UN generals.

Big Foot.

For my web critique analysis, I chose the website about Big Foot—http://www.bfro.net.

On this webpage, the graphics are not hard to find. In fact, they are everywhere. Whether one does or does not believe in the sasquatch theory, it is a visually pleasing website. The photos help the website be easily navigable, and also provide evidence to aid the writer’s research. The graphics, along with the text are displayed in a column in the middle of the page.

There is less text than graphics. The text fits with the graphics in a harmonious nature. However, the text is obviously not the main point of the website—the graphics take that role. Unlike the graphics, which are displayed in the both the main column and the side bar, much of the text is in a series of links along the side of the page. The other form text takes is in labels and titles.

The text and color used on the page is mostly dark colors. The background in black. The text is blue and white. There is use of dark green and drab blue behind pictures. I feel that these are colors people equate to horror movies and suspense. It creates an effect of the unknown, which is exactly what the research on this website is about.

Each page has relations to the front page. They all have similar color schemes. Yet they all have small changes in format: one won’t have columns, another will have bullet points, another will have very little in the image department and a lot in the textual department. Since they are all based on the recurring theme of Big Foot, I do not think they could exist solely by themselves.

A Moment Captured on Film

Being a photographer myself, I enjoyed looking at the prize-winning Pulitzer photos immensely. As usual, I found myself analyzing the angles and the focus, etc, but more than that, I found it hard to choose a monumental, argument-making photo. Obviously, since they ALL won the Pulitzer, they ALL make a strong statement.

Eventually I settled on a photo that is relevant to us today, taken by 2005 winner Deanne Fitzmaurice. It is of an Iraqi boy nearly killed by an explosion. There were more photos in the series, all documenting the process of healing the boy and integrating him back into society. This one speaks to me the most, however.

When a person first looks at the photograph, their eyes are automatically drawn to the boy's "hands," or lack-there-of. The picture plays on the emotions: "how horrible," "how sad," "how amazing." More than simply the absence of real hands, one sees the marker and the boy drawing on the paper just as any other child his age would.

His scars. His hands. His recovery.

It's all in the photo.

Back to the Milblog

After reading some new posts, I am reminded once more of both the terrible sadness and the ironic hilarity of the people suffering from the war. I only read three posts, but two of them really stuck out to me:

The first was a post from a sergeant. It was one of the most hilarious things I have heard all week. The sgt. talked about his Marines. Simply stated, they complained a lot about the horrible living quarters and what they have to go through. He/she continued on with the pitfalls of being in charge of these Marines: dealing with lazy ones, overweight ones, and the ones who want to get married or get divorced. It was called “Safely Handling Radioactive Stupid”—I would highly recommend it to everyone. It was good to know that, as I posted on a comment, all soldiers in the Middle East are not just experiencing doom and gloom.

The second one I read was by an Air Force wife. It was a heart-breaking tale of an experience she had through her children’s school. In signing up for school, the paperwork required information about her husband/their father…and she was simply not ready to be reminded of his absence.

Again, I found myself sort of reeling after reading the milblog again. Those people have so much more passion about what they’re doing, more than anyone I have ever met.

My Explorations of wonkette.com

The political blog I chose to “review” was wonkette.com. (I assure you, it was not because it was the first on the list, nor because it has a cool name.) I glanced through all the websites and settled on this one because it seemed to have an array of political topics.

In responding to the book’s requested responses on question five, I think that these bloggers try to point out fallacies by the tone they use. The writers do not specifically say, “This is a fallacy of argument.” However, I feel like their tone in an article shows their opinion on whatever they are writing about. Many times it is quite obvious to the reader what the writer is trying to get at, and I have found this throughout basically all of the articles I have looked at on this website.

The first fallacy I noticed after studying the site came from the topic that has us all going around in circles after President Obama’s speech to Congress on Wednesday. The article on Wonkette was called “Obama Accepts that Wingnut’s Apology.” I feel that this is the fallacy entitled Slippery Slope. The fact that the article is the second article posted on Wonkette shows that it is already too big of a deal, as agrees the writer of the article. Along with that, I found at least five other articles following the story as well. It was not very professional of Joe Wilson to “call out” like that in a Congressional session, especially using the language that he did, and most anyone would admit that. But it is simply not something that is very important to dwell on. As the writer says, “His obnoxiousness stands out quite well already.”

Another fallacy I found was in an article a little farther down with the title “A Children’s Treasury of Nancy Pelosi Animated.GIFS.” The most disconcerting thing about this article was the picture they showed beside it—a weird conglomeration of Nancy Pelosi with a crown on her head and arrows with a label of “sexy” pointing to her, behind President Obama with a skeleton head and a flashing “Gangsta” necklace, beside Joe Biden smoking a cigarette and holding a bottle of alcohol. Obviously this was all animated, yet I believe it falls under the fallacy Sentimental Appeals. Not that this is an overwhelmingly “heart-warming or heart-wrenching situation,” but it provides images of the three politicians in a bad light. If a reader already has a negative image of any of the three, they would be encouraged to sink deeper into their pessimism of the leaders of the White House.

I noticed another after exploring the site a bit more, and it came from the first article a reader sees when they enter the site: “Levi Johnston to pose nearly nude for gay website.” My first instinctual reaction was to start, wonder what in the world an article about a gay website could be doing on a political blog, and read the article to find out who exactly Levi Johnston is. (Granted, I’m not a news junky—especially political junk—so I wasn’t in the know about Levi Johnston being Sarah Palin’s “almost son-in-law.”) I feel that this, as the first fallacy I mentioned, is the fallacy Slippery Slope. In the end of the article, it said, “Sarah Palin is now an unemployed twitterer and Levi Johnston is the celebrity (?) of September 2009. Who could’ve predicted it?” That statement really blows the situation out of proportion. While Sarah Palin was a celebrity of sorts during the election, I can’t imagine someone I (as well as possibly a good number of other people) I have never heard of becoming a celebrity. Along with the previous two paragraphs, this one also helps prove my earlier statement saying that the bloggers imply the fallacies of argument in which they write about. It was very clear to me that the writer found the story so ridiculous that he needed to share it with others.

A fallacy I found proficiently clear in an article titled “Spanky Cumsack Resigns from California State Assembly” was blatant in the title. This I found to be Dogmatism. While the evidence in Mike Duvall’s “sex scandal” is basically incriminating, this does not mean that just because he is a politician, and just because he was caught in this sort of act, means that he is guilty of doing the dirty deed. The writer of the article seems to think so: “Mike Duvall has freaking resigned already for being disgusting.” Again, this blatantly shows the writer’s opinion, and he or she certainly knows that it is also pointing a finger at Mike Duvall.

I found all of these articles, along with others, to prove that the site is basically one big fallacy of argument. That being considered, these are all blogs, so they are the blogger’s personal opinions without stating them outright. Thus being said, they prove my point on bloggers inferring the fallacies.

My Wiki

To be quite honest, I cannot imagine huge uses in having a wiki (personally). I believe it makes sense in a database such as Wikipedia, or on a webpage such as the professor’s the link took us to. However, for personal use, it seems to be simply another webpage to add to the collection.

While blogs have become a huge thing in terms of the World Wide Web, I’m not sure wikis will. Perhaps I don’t quite understand the point of them yet. Obviously there is a market for wikis—when I googled it, I got several thousand hits. What its purpose is, I have yet to discover.

Other than the fact that the website makes my computer run a little slower, I feel like having to work with another type of website has been beneficial. A little frustrating, I’ll admit, but as a young person, I feel it is good to keep up on all types of technology.

http://ahlearnard.pbworks.com/

flickr.com

For my website "analysis," I chose flickr.com. This is a website for sharing photos--many photographers use this website to showcase their work. I use Flickr frequently, mostly for displaying my photography and receiving feedback on them.

To answer the first question ("Why is a Web site...the best way to present this material?"), I present another question: What other way could material such as this be presented? As digital photography is the way the photography world is going, having a website to display photos is the ideal way to go. Flickr is easy to use, and open for comments regarding photos.

This transitions into the next question ("What advantages over a print text or a live oral/media presentation does this website have?"). I do not think that Flickr could be produced into a print text, but it could be presented orally. However, there would really be no point in making an oral presentation of this website, other than to raise membership and vocalize the website. As said before, Flickr works perfectly well as simply a website.

The third and fourth questions raise issues of a whole new matter. Money is the only way to "translate" this website into print or oral presentation. It would cost a great fortune to produce a printed magazing of the thousands of photos that are displayed on Flickr.

Moreover, it would be less convenient for photographers: not everyone who wanted to publish photos could if Flickr was in print.Many budding photographers, like myself, would be left out of publishing. As I said before, Flickr is a great way to receive feedback on photos, and in print form it would be much more difficult to leave comments on specific photos.

Ads, Ads, Ads.

In my communication class, my professor spoke about how much the average person remembers based on listening to a lecture. The statistics are amazing: sixty-five percent of what is heard is not retained during the first day of hearing a lecture or speech. After twenty-four hours, a person loses another fifteen percent of what he or she heard.

Although the lecture on YouTube was a fairly short one, I feel as though it was very engaging. I watched it last night; after twenty-four hours, I remember most of it (surprisingly enough!). As stated in the chapter we read in our book, chapter fifteen, eye contact is an important part of connecting with the audience during an oral presentation. Even though I was not in the speaker’s direct audience, I found myself engrossed by her continual eye contact and also her conversational tone.

Along with these, the speaker was casually dressed and used her hands as though she were in a personal conversation with someone. I felt that this was fitting, as it seemed her audience was college-age (a more informal people group as a whole). Occasionally, she would make an amusing comment or joke. This also added to the appeal of a topic that would otherwise be blasé and mostly uninteresting in a different setting.

The visuals of this lecture were what really sold the package for me. Not only were they appalling--some even slightly offensive to some people--they were real evidence of the information the speaker was verbalizing. The visuals went well with her speech. They did not distracting from but rather adding to what she was saying. Perhaps it is because I am a visual learner, these are really what sticks in my mind when I recall her lecture.

Personally, I found this presentation to be extremely effective. However, I fit into a category that would find a majority of it very interesting: I am a woman. The advertising industry as a whole probably targets women more than men. As was stated in the lecture, women learn from a young age that they are supposed to look and act a certain way. Advertisements are supposed to tell women who they are and what they should buy to look that way. I am no exception; I am preyed on every day.

Overall, I found the statistics to be home run, if you will. Meaning that for all demographics, the statistics presented about how much we are bombarded with advertisement was astonishing yet believably true. I felt that without these statistics, the presentation would have failed to inform many people on just how much advertisement is part of our society.

Now, even more well-informed on the advertising industry, I find myself on Facebook… noticing all the ads on the side of my screen.

The "War": Relevant but Not

As I said in one of my comments on a "milblog", I don't know a lot about what is continually going on in the Middle East. I am not related (by blood or just relationship) to anyone who is serving over there. Even news about the "war"--as we all seem prone to call it--has been hard to come by in recent months.

However, there are always the so-called typical war stories. We have certainly all heard them, and we certainly all feel for the soldiers who are forced to live with that in their heads for the rest of their lives.

But do we really know? I can't say I've ever experienced the brutal killing of a good friend. The comraderie in a group thrown together by chance. Waking up every morning knowing that today could be the last day of life on earth.

I read a post from a soldier who took a trip back to his/her station and reflected on all the things that have changed from serving in the war. I read another about a captain who posted on the lengthy process of shooting practice and it's metaphor to how we are not getting things done in Iraq. I read yet another on the experiences of war, both good and bad.

There are millions of American soldiers over in the Middle East, just like the ones who posted on the "milblog." They don't have to be there. Many of them probably don't even want to be there in the first place. And yet the news continues to produce a vacancy in all reports: a vacancy that the "war" used to fill.

If I could label one thing I learned from reading a "milblog", it would be that I need to continually remember what is taking place not only the Middle East, but in countries all over the world. Men and women are sacrificing everything they hold dear in the name of our country.

I personally find it an outrage that the media finds Michael Jackson more important than the "war." It would not hurt us to be a little grateful.

A Blog for 17 Million of Your Closest Friends

I’ll admit, I was a little wary of beginning a blog. Naturally, I have a Facebook, multiple e-mail accounts, and several different kinds of software that I use nearly every day. I have a cell phone, a laptop, and an iPod. I’m not exactly infantile in my knowledge of technology.

However, having a blog is a different story. Having a successful blog takes a whole different turn from that, even. Obviously one wants their blog to be read, so he or she has to learn how to construct it in a way that attracts healthy attention.
Healthy being the keyword.

As for teens posting intimate blogs, I cannot say I condone the behavior--I do not think that it attracts the said healthy attention a blogger deserves. Perhaps it is because I have always been a private person, I appreciate keeping my personal life to myself and those close to me. Perhaps it is because I simply find displaying all of your problems online for millions to read is a juvenile way of saying, “Look at me! I love throwing a pity party for myself!”

That being said, I completely understand the need for expression. I also understand that expression is another way of showing the world who you are, or who you are not. For instance, I am a singer and a writer. Nothing soothes me more than screaming out some “Phantom of the Opera” while filling page after page of sometimes incomprehensible poetry. And yet this is not the me I have created on Facebook. On a screen, I can be witty, sarcastic, or even famous. Anyone can be perfect online. That is the point that makes teen blogging so appealing.

There are so many horror stories out there. Teen gets date raped by someone she met online. Teen gets murdered by online predator. But even beyond these, problems from posting everything online can result from employers, parents, and teachers.

I don’t know about all of them, but I think I’ll keep my private life in a spot where it’s most enjoyable: in private.

Ours is the Internet Age: I for one did not know there was so much controversy over “hyper-reading” and “hypertext”--yet the scholarly world seems to have many problems with both of these concepts. The main problem for academics lies in the barely researchable reading that is found in hypertext. As Sosnoski states in his writing, “Because readers characteristically navigate textual landscapes by searching them for key words and thus often omitting passages that do not ‘match,’ hyper-reading will be labeled ‘subjective,’ ‘superficial,’ and ‘de-contextualized’” (Sosnoski 164).

While this is understandable, one must remember that academia is only a small portion of the population that uses computers. The rest of us? I doubt we have much of an excuse to be opposed to hyper-reading, other than the fact that if you spend too much time in front of a computer screen, your eyes will be tired.

I give Sosnoski credit for labeling and explaining the breakdown of hyper-reading: “filtering,” “skimming,” “pecking,” “imposing,” “filming,” “trespassing,” “de-authorizing,” and “fragmenting” (163). As I read the description of each of these items, I found myself silently agreeing: when I am researching topics on the Internet, I automatically wade through the many options and passages that I could read that might be related to my research. I filter, I skim, I impose… Each person, knowingly or not, completes at least one of the actions from this list during hyper-reading. It is a study in human behavior that Sosnoski has nailed solidly.
In the end, Sosnoski was seemingly on the fence about the good side and the bad side of hyper-reading. “[He] believe[s] that phenomenon such as hyper-reading will be perceived by anti-cybernauts as a loss of coherence, substance, and depth” (173). I would say that his belief is perfectly accurate. As we all know, hyper-reading is going to become increasingly common. Again agreeing with Sosnoski, I think that this won’t (and shouldn’t) replace books--the dead-tree kind, as one of my other professors likes to call it.

That doesn’t mean that we all can’t learn to adapt a little with the changing technology.