W5Thog

This week, we went more in-depth about writer's moves and their functions. Learning about these moves is really cool, because it opens up new perspectives on the way I read and write. When I read, I'm able to look for moves that not only affect the rhetoric of the piece, but more-so give me an idea of what the authors intentions are and what kind of audience the piece is directed toward. All in all, this ties in to being more aware and less likely to be mislead or spun. From a writing perspective, learning how author's use moves is extremely beneficial because I can apply the good moves to the way I write and learn from the ones that I think are not so effective. By gaining more experience with moves and observing them or using them myself, they seem to become easier to identify and I end up using them without even thinking. They can take the form of both content and structure, which is also really cool. By analyzing structural moves, I've derived a better idea of how to structure my writing to achieve the clearest format that makes the most sense to the reader. I've had a bit more trouble identifying all of the content-based moves because they aren't as explicit as structure, but with time and practice, I believe they will become more clear and more second-nature. I really like the things we are learning. It's cool stuff!

PB2b

Messi dribbles down the field, cuts right, leaving the midfielder on his ass, not knowing what hit him. He steps over the ball--faking the first defender out-- and does a scissor to escape the presence of the next. Messi touches the ball to the outside, he shoots, he scores! Goalllllllllllllll!!!! You see, Messi used his moves in order to score, which contributed to his ultimate objective- winning the game. Moves can be used by people of all sorts in order to accomplish an ultimate goal. When applied to writing, moves can tell us a ton about a piece. By analysing the author’s moves and identifying the intentions and functions behind them, we can derive a clearer understanding of the rhetoric behind a piece and become more-cognitive readers and writers.

In the article Why Blog? the author, Alex Reid, uses several moves found in the They Say, I Say Appendix. She starts her article with a quote explaining what it takes to become an expert at something: “but the fairly self-evident bottom line point here is that becoming good at anything worth becoming good at takes a lot of time.” She follows with an explanation of the quote--her move--which clarifies the point of the quote and functions as an introduction to her entire article. This explanation is effective because it explains why the quote is significant and goes to show that you don’t necessarily have to be an expert at something for it to apply to your life. The next move I identified in the article was entertaining objections. She begins the second paragraph stating, “Of course, most students aren’t interested in becoming expert writers.” This quote functions as a comfort builder for the reader. It addresses the fact that many students aren’t interested in becoming writers, even though the article is about blogging which is a form a writing. This is effective as well because it shows the reader that they don’t have to be an expert writer in order to enjoy blogging. She then makes a concession while still holding her ground: “ I don’t think there’s anything wrong with not wanting to become an expert, professional writer, any more than there’s anything wrong with wanting to be a surgeon or a carpenter.On the other hand, unlike surgeon or carpentry, college students pursuing professional careers will need some facility with writing.” This quote entertains that fact that writing isn’t an appealing career to most, but explains that there is cross-over between writing and other professions which proves its importance and signifies the author standing her ground. She also introduces an ongoing debate: “decades of research suggests that such extrinsic motivators(grades) can actually hurt our performance on challenging intellectual tasks like writing an essay.” This prove that it is a significant issue and functions as support to answer the main question of the article: why blog?(opposed to writing in a more formal, academic manner). Lastly, the author introduces a standard view in order to make the reader feel more applicable to this article and feel as though it applies directly toward them: “As a student in a first year writing course, you may not envision yourself as a writer.”  This statement conforms to most first-year students so its function is very effective.

Aside from the moves that were provided for us, I was able to identify some effective moves from different articles on my own. In the article Teaching Two Kinds of Thinking, the author uses a move I call “Explanatory Metaphors”. These are metaphors that the author uses in order to paint a clearer picture of what they are talking about for the reader. In the article it says, “It seems to many listeners as though I’m celebrating holidays from thinking.” This gives the reader an exaggerated idea of what free-writing is like for the author. Next, the author uses a move I like to call “What I like to do”. This move gives the reader a sense of the author’s personality and allows them to form an opinion on the author’s methods without questioning where the information is coming from. For example it says, “I like to emphasize how second-order thinking often brings out people’s worst thinking.” This is effective because it make the author sound unbiased, due to him expressing his thoughts opposed to expressing them as a statement; it makes the author more credible. In this article, the author also uses a move I call “Separating Content” which structures the article in a comprehensive, easy-to-understand way. It begins with explaining first and second order thinking and is followed by a separate section that links the two together. The next section then contrasts the previously explained “links” and explains the broader picture and how they function in a section subtitled practical consequences. This is an effective way of laying out the article because the information builds upon itself and re-enforces the ideas explained in the previous sections. Next, In Navigating Genres, the author uses a move I call “fishing with a Joke”. The article begins with a joke about country music that exemplifies how understanding the conventions of the genre is necessary in order to find humor in the joke. This is effective because it not only functions as a hook for the reader, but shows what the article is going to be about. The author also uses a move I call “Downing with Evidence” which essentially means drowning the reader with evidence. The author provides tons of quotes in order to support his claims and show credibility. He explains an idea and supports his explanation with direct evidence. This move is extremely effective because it provides clarity and credibility.

Identifying the author’s moves is an essential component in understanding the rhetoric behind a piece. From identifying these moves, we can derive a better understanding of how they function and how effective they really are. By doing so, we can become better writers and readers.

Week 4 Thlog

I felt like this week was very beneficial for me becoming a more effective reader and writer. We learned a lot about the author's moves, and how they can tell us about the intended audience, the author's intentions and any hidden truths the paper has. In addition, learning about the writers moves can help us in our own writing. By analyzing the writer's moves and seeing how they have laid out their paper and portrayed their ideas in a certain format, we can derive certain aspects from it that we like and think would work effectively in our own work. At first, I found it a bit difficult identifying the writer's format and "moves", because the pieces we read in class were structured differently and didn't exactly have a uniform way of presenting ideas and laying them out. However, after making a reverse layout and actually reading the body paragraphs before the intro and thesis, it made the piece easier to understand and I was about to identify some of the author's moves and form an opinion on them. Aside from the work we did in class and identifying the most important parts of a publication through the PB1b, I learned more about author's moves and identifying them through the reader Reading like a Writer. I learned some interesting approaches on how to identify these moves which ultimately gives me a better understanding of the rhetoric behind a piece. All in all, this was a very beneficial week for me and I feel like I'm learning a lot of cool, new things.

PB2a-JB

Deception caused by Fast Food Advertisements

“Children’s Recall of Fast Food Television Advertising- Testing the Adequacy of Food Marketing Regulation” is the publication I chose to analyze and compare to the SCI generator. This scholarly publication about the adequacy of Mcdonald’s and Burger King’s advertisements tests their rhetorical features in order to derive a clearer sense of what they are actually portraying, and how they are affecting the thought and decision processes of youthful viewers. Furthermore, The Fast Food advertisement publication possesses many of the same conventions as the SCI generator structurally and with content. By comparing the conventions and pinpointing the most important aspects of publications, we can derive a better understanding of the rhetoric behind them and identify any biased or persuasion tools; Identifying the publication’s true intentions can help us form accurate opinions on the issue and avoid being mislead.

Structurally, the scholarly publication I chose and the SCI generator are nearly identical. They both begin with presenting the reader with an abstract explaining the background, methods, results, and conclusion of the experiment to give the reader a summary or a general understanding of what the publication is about. Then, they are followed by an introduction and an explanation of how they went about conducting the experiment. Both publications include graphs, charts and diagrams,too. Lastly, they both have a conclusion followed by a reference page which adds to the publication’s credibility. The only difference in structure between the publication I chose and the SCI generator is the addition that my publication made, including supporting information-videos showing kids partaking in the experiment. With respect to content, both publications were rather parallel as well. They both possessed sophisticated, academic language and presented facts instead of opinion. They used logos-statistics and graphs- to prove a their findings, and created a sense of ethos through references, examples and supporting information. They didn’t, however, use pathos explicitly because they were experiments that used facts in order to prove a point.

Aside from comparing the conventions of the publication I chose, identifying the most important aspects of the piece was crucial in order to fully understand what it was trying to portray. First off, the introduction is a key component of the publication. It answers the “so what?” question, and presents the reader with a problem the experiment will attempt to answer. In “Children’s Recall of Fast Food Advertising”, the introduction exemplifies the immense amount of money that the fast food industry pours into marketing, and the laws behind such advertisements. Then, it presents the reader with the facts, exposing Mcdonald’s and Burger King for breaking these rules and regulations regarding deception, and introduces their experiment-testing the deceptiveness of the advertisements on youth.

The response assessment and statistical analysis sections were very important as well. These sections explained how the testers went about the procedure, analyzed their data, and explained what the these tests signified. Under the Response Assessment sub-heading, it explains the testing procedure to give the reader a clear understanding of what was actually tested. For example, it says, “Children were scheduled to come to the research laboratory with one parent...While the parent completed a questionnaire, the child was shown one of each of the four types of ads, with each one randomly selected from the ad pool and shown in random order, with the procedure carried out by an internally developed software program that also displayed the ads to the children…”. Under the Statistical Analysis section it states, “Children’s responses, defined as one or more words versus no mention per each category, were dichotomized to reflect any recall or no recall of food, healthy food (i.e., apples or milk), or premium/tie-ins. The proportion of children with any recall for each of the three categories was summarized by ad type, and McNemar’s test was used to determine if the likelihood of any recall differed by ad type.” This clarifies the purpose of these tests and shows what the responses actually mean in order to give the reader a full understanding of the experiment.

In addition to clarifying what the experiment is about, It’s also very important to show credibility. The supporting evidence section and the references page on the Fast Food Advertisement publication were imperative. These exemplified the publication’s use of ethos and made the piece credible. Without these essential components, the reader is left wondering where the facts came from and whether the claim is even logical or where it;s supported.

Identifying the key components of the publication can help derive the most important 
information, but can also tell us a bit about the author’s purpose. In this case, the author of the publications wants to prove a point, but to do so, they must exemplify credibility. With credibility and supporting facts, the the main idea presented by the publication is in fact logical, and can be used to formulate accurate and meaningful opinions on the topic.

Thlog week 3

This week, the primary emphasis was our WP1. I really liked this week's activities and thought I gained a lot from them. Doing the revising activities in groups was really beneficial because I got feedback from other people as well as insight on other people's writing. The combination of two definitely helped me improve my WP1 because I was able to add things in that helped the content and flow of my paper.  I was previously unclear on how I would go about incorporating outside sources in my paper, but after seeing multiple examples from my group member's work, I felt more confident about including them in my paper. In high school, I felt like getting feedback from classmates was useless because it was mostly made up of any bullshit a classmate could write down in order to make it look like they were actually doing something during class. Because of the lack of quality feedback, my papers were almost 100% revised by myself which usually consisted of a few grammer corrections and punctual revisions. With a paper outlining the revision process and having intelligent, hard-working students give me feedback, I was thrilled to revise my paper according to their criticism because it was honest and meaningful. Getting feedback from others is a great way for me to become a more effective writer, so I'm very happy that it's a part of this class.

week 2 thlog

This week, I learned more about conventions from the homework and review that we did in class. I really don't mind doing the homework because I feel like I'm becoming better at understanding rhetoric and making parallels with what we are learning in class to the real world. It's really cool! I thought identifying all of the conventions of the three different genres for pb1b was a bit more challenging, but I liked it because it made me better at analyzing genre. I also learned that while analyzing genre, we can look for patterns both structural and with content. When Zack went over the genres for pb1b, it really helped me understand how these things relate to understanding conventions on a deeper level because he made it clear to me that there are all kinds of ways to look at conventions. We can derive meaning, content, format, intentions etc.. I'm stoked on the new material I'm learning in this class and excited about what the rest of the quarter has to offer.

PB1b

Analyzing Generators

After assessing the different stylistic patterns of the genre generators, it’s clear that different genres possess different conventions both with style and content. In addition, some genres have conventions that are very explicit, and others have conventions that are much harder to Identify. Analysing these conventions are essential in order to derive the fullest amount of understanding from genres; this plays a key role in understanding a piece’s rhetoric.

The meme generator possessed conventions that were as basic as the structure and and as complex as the content of the piece. Every meme started with a statement at the top of the picture in larger letters, and was followed by a resolution or an additional comment in smaller letters that commented on the initial statement. With respect to content, almost every meme used satire that related to the character or person’s facial expression. Many of the photos were comical, taken off-guard and random which evidently made the comments sarcastic, dumb, or profound.

In contrast to the meme generator, the content of the computer science reports was rather dry and boring. However, there were conventions that related to the structure and layout of these reports. Each report started with an initial topic that fulfilled the “so what” question. The initial statement posed a problem that the report would attempt to explain and resolve. Furthermore, the experiment included at least one diagram to clarify what the report was explaining, and then was followed by graphs that explained the results. The reports all included resources at the bottom too that seemed to be randomly generated.

Lastly, the comic strip generator possessed conventions that were opposite to those of the computer science report generator. It lacked structural patterns, but had consistent traits with interactions between characters. The green-shirted character was extremely violent and negative in his actions and words, and used profound language consistently. Simon consistently made sounds and did very random stuff that would leave the viewer dumbfounded or confused. Identifying these conventions associated with individual characters helps identify their personality. In addition, the two character’s interactions weren’t exactly in sync. There were extensive cases where “green shirt” would ask simon a question and the next frame, where one would expect a response, didn’t relate to the question asked in the first place. From this, it is obvious that the order of the slides was random, except for the initial slide included some form of text.

Thinking about what is going on in these random generator websites and identifying patterns directly relates to understanding a genre. Each individual program behind these generators signifies a pattern, or a convention, which is then produced in each of the randomly generated pieces. Each genre is constructed with patterns and conventions that, well, make it a genre. Therefore, the conventions of a genre and the conventions of a randomly generated program parallel each other. It is imperative to identify these conventions because it plays a key role in understanding the rhetoric behind a piece. Finding structural patterns within a piece can help improve its clarity and help someone understand its rhetoric faster and more efficiently. Aside from deriving efficiency and clarity, identifying conventions can help one view a piece more empathetically in a way that prevents cynicism from taking control. With the ability to understand the underlying truth or discover personality traits, intentions, or hidden messages, while discarding a provincial outlook, it’s possible to gain a deeper and more thorough understanding of a genre and what it intends to portray. There are so many different ways to approach a genre and form an opinion on it, so looking at it with an open mind and searching for explanatory traits is essential.  

Fast Food Advertisements - PB1a

The fast food industry is one of the most powerful and persuasive industries in America. Everywhere you go, whether it’s a few miles down the street to the grocery store, a trip to the beach or a vacation to another country, there’s fast food advertisements with big signs colored in red and yellow that are suppose to make you hungry. Whether it’s on a billboard, a sign, a commercial or pasted in the windows of the restaurants themselves, these advertisements are all bound by similar conventions that give the fast food industry its negative image through the eyes of critics and skeptics.

Commercials are one of the main sources of persuasion that these companies use to draw customers in. They have playful vibes and smiles with groovy tunes that give the viewer a sense of comfort, followed by mascots or cartoon characters which contribute to the positive vibe. For Mcdonald, it’s Ronald Mcdonald and friends. For Burger king it’s the big-headed smiling king and for Carl’s junior, it’s the Happy Star. All of these examples possess the same characteristics that contribute to the positive vibe intended to persuade the younger portion of their audience.

Fast food advertisements also highlight teamwork to show that they “actually care” about the customer’s satisfaction and overall experience. In commercials that exemplify the daily duties of fast food workers, they’re smiling and look like they actually enjoy themselves as they work together to cater to the customers’ needs. In the 2015 youtube Mcdonalds commercial, a little boy orders an ice cream cone from an enthusiastic, smiling cashier who then proceeds to serve him. The little boy immediately drops the cone and frowns, but is cheered up seconds later by the cashier who gives him a new cone.

In addition to catchy advertisements that evoke a sense of pathos from the viewer, fast food companies use deals to persuade the older portion of the audience or the most general population. Two for the price of one is one of the most commonly used deals that fast food companies are grossly criticized for. The food may be extremely affordable, but it’s also very low quality, mass produced and very unhealthy. In 2014, Mcdonalds advertised Big Macs as being two for the price of one. Yes, two is better than one, but eating two Big Mac’s is extremely unhealthy. A single Big Mac contains 33g of fat which is 50% of a standard daily value. Eating two fulfills and an entire day’s worth of fat in just a single meal. Almost every fast food company has a dollar menu too, which is even more appealing and affordable. Presenting an audience with deals exemplifies fast food companies use of logos to persuade, and is indeed effective when used to draw in customers.

Fast food companies also intend to develop a sense of ethos for themselves by making themselves sound credible and more qualified than their competition. On most Mcdonalds signs below the big, yellow M, it says something to the effect of “billions and billions served”. This is supposed to persuade the viewer that they are a very qualified restaurant because so many people have eaten there. Additionally, in every Wendy’s commercial, they highlight the freshness of their natural ingredients which is intended to make their food seem higher quality than their competition who use shitty ingredients. What Wendy’s, McDonalds, and many other companies have in common is the competitive nature to persuade and mislead- gasoline that fuels the fire for affordances from the book Fast Food Nation to the documentary Supersize Me.

Mcdonald’s youtube commercial: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZCbvpJ4O6c

James's Week One Thlog

This week I learned about conventions and how identifying them is imperative in order to truly analyze a genre. Learning this has really opened my mind to the many structures and patterns of genres, and has made me look at the world differently. Identifying these patterns in the world around me has made me more skeptical while analyzing situations and I now question the rhetorical features of anything that has the potential to mislead or spin me. I feel that I am more confident in myself when making decisions based on information derived from advertisements too. This has been very beneficial to me and I look forward to learning more about rhetorical analysis un depth.