Photo-Essay

This has been a really fun project. I feel like I have a much better grasp on blogging and digital rhetoric. It certainly has opened up my world and added a little enthusiasm to what otherwise was a pretty negative attitude toward the value of IText. I believe much of my cynicism stemmed from not fully understanding the motivations behind blogging and I thought it was just downright silly to think you could start typing and people would suddenly flock to your page every day and consume whatever it was you were selling.

What I learned is that the primary motivation behind most blogs is the sharing of information. The number one way bloggers gauge success is by the personal satisfaction they get from creating their posts. Also high on the list is the amount of interaction they have with their audience. Many report making friends on their blogs. To me, it comes down to a sense of community. Blogging is generally like a big conversation that can happen anywhere, at any time. If I look at it that way I can't help but think that it's pretty cool.

So here's the first of four pages I created on my blog (click here!). At the bottom of each page you'll find a link to the next page, or you can look at the right nav bar under "Pages." All four are there for you to peruse. Thanks for reading. In the spirit of the blogging world, I hope you learn something and comment and make this feel a little bit more like a community than a project for school.

-Matt

You're the Teacher

Anderson's Ted talk was interesting to say the least. He is counted as one of the "innovators" he was speaking of. But his desire to share, to "open up" his ideas and his medium is causing his idea to spread. I suppose this is what the utopian idea of the web has been for its innovators. Rather than stifling and hording ideas, you open them up to the world and encourage imitation.

But imitating Ted is not a passive kind of piracy. As Anderson says, it takes "huge amounts of effort." He describes those who imitate as "teachers." And each one of us has the capacity to be that teacher to the world. Very inspiring. It definitely casts a positive light on these new tools - the video/internet interface. And this idea of "crowd accelerated innovation" seems a lot like education, only you're flattening the traditional model. Here, anyone is an educator. There are no rules, no paperwork or exams. Your experience is your ethos and your work is your lesson.

I got a little "spark" from what Anderson said about video being the return to face-to-face communication. The spark came in the form of a forehead-slapping moment. This new IText form of communication is simply a proxy for face-to-face communication. Whether it's video or Twitter or mobile phone texts, the result is the same. We are simply replicating this face to face interaction that we cannot always have. We have even replicated the speech patterns, in the case of these short-hand writing styles. But video seems to be the most authentic form of this new way of communicating. Rhetoric seems to be coming full-circle by returning to the roots of delivery via sound, sight and speech.

There are the darker sides of this rhetorical revolution, such as Wallace's "Asians in the Library." The ability to respond in-kind seems to counter the evil that can be injected into the webosphere. Is this productive? A bunch of bickering back and forth? Hate being spewed in every direction? "Tatas hangin' out" and "skeezy white trash" (xmonmon) comments don't seem to meaningfully contribute to the discourse of racial tolerance. Rants tend to be self-serving, a kind of invective spewed out to like-minded individuals who take pleasure either in other people's self-loathing or those looking for a fight. I've been guilty of this. For about two weeks I was addicted to the Jerry Sandusky/Joe Paterno drama in the online forums at ESPN.com. Go ahead - judge me. I deserve it.

ua.edu

 This leads me to the age of rage article by Adams. This new form of cyber-bullying is in most cases aided by the use of aliases. Remaining anonymous has emboldened a new generation of bullies, able to carry out their verbal attacks without even the underlying fear of having their asses kicked by picking on the wrong person. I believe the "kick" is the same for these people as it is for the physical bully. Their reward is seeing the level of discourse descend into bickering. Whatever their agenda, their goal is to steer the agenda of everyone else off track. I've read about and experienced these types of people in group dynamics. This "deindividuation" is certainly the underbelly of chat rooms and forums. Instead of growing as individuals, these "trolls" detract from not only their own potential, but the potential of the group by drawing others into a "mob mentality." Trolls usually end up garnering much of the attention. In some cases, as Adams points out, they become more popular than the blogger or author of the piece that is being debated.

But there is that good with the bad balance that the online community must strike. Anonymity allows for freer expression. But it also leads to anarchy. The question is who polices it? A moderator? The online community? Is there a way to eliminate trolling? And what about the people who don't hide behind an alias. What about the Wallace's of the world? Do we simply place them in the category of sad human beings or do we stand up and fight back? The irony of the web is that stupidity and hate can create popularity. I suppose that is true in a lot of media. I'd love to hear some other thoughts on this. It's all so new and yet we are debating the pros and cons already. The genie is out of the bottle. But where's the palace?

Chickens and Eggs

http://brodylevesque.blogspot.com

Does the genre dictate the format of the Text or does the format dictate the genre? For example, does the fact that you are texting dictate that your Text is a text? (hope that's not too confusing with all the "texts") I guess this gets down to how important the format is in determining its genre. Does hypertext really open up brand new genres? And if so, do other genres die? Does this mean that the way we write dictates the writing produced? Is all this technology fundamentally changing rhetoric? I'd love to hear some opinions on this. I think it's important to our conversation about hypertext and what it means for rhetoric now and in the future.

Love for Bozeman

I enjoyed everyone's short a/v projects tremendously. I think I really connected with Savannah's piece. The music, the imagery and the fact that it followed a storyline I think were the key elements that drew me into it. I think this video did a couple things really well:

1. It told a story of what I think was a homecoming of sorts, as the video fast-forwards over I-90. As I often do after being away from Bozeman for a while, she cruised down Main Street, visited her coffee shop and watched a classic Montana sunset.

2. I liked the theme of transportation running throughout. This video had the feeling of going somewhere...never being stagnant or boring. It took the time to focus on a few things, but generally was true to a 1.5 minute video - it was punchy and moved quickly, varying the imagery. The use of the (Chaco'd) feet was a great way to pull her into the video and adds to the feel of movement, almost giving the viewer that feeling of being along for the ride.

3. It focused on what I assume Savannah feels is important in life, which gives us a glimpse into the author's life. I'm one of those consumers of rhetoric who loves to speculate: is this the author speaking directly to me about what his/her life is like, or is this a creation of some sort of fiction, or a blending of both. She obviously went out with a video camera and a purpose - to make a video about Bozeman - but how much of this is true to her life and how much is "made for tv?"

4. Intentionally or not, she also brought into the video some of the elements we have been studying lately. Like I said above, we can only speculate on what part of this video was her and what was created for the camera, but I like how it tied in with the idea that McCloud put forward - that you will receive the message only if you don't know too much about the messenger (37). Indeed, there are several "actresses" in the film, but we're never sure which one is Savannah. Does she cartoonize her experience in Bozeman? I'm not sure I would go that far, but it certainly is interesting to think about it in that way.

She also integrated much of the icon/signage elements discussed in McCloud. Icons such as the Ellen, Music Villa and even the Coop building "represent a person, place, thing or idea" (27). Indeed, I believe in this film, they represented all four concepts. Notice she didn't put Costco or REI in the film. She used the icons that portray Bozeman as a local, funky, independent bastion of individualism. In fact, they seem to reflect this spirit in how Savannah sees herself, or how she would like to be seen. Again, we don't truly know.

That leads me to my last point, which is that this film is more than just a snapshot of Bozeman. It is Bozeman, seen through the lens of Savannah. And this is an important distinction. I would go so far as to say that this is about Savannah: about what she thinks is important in life. It is her identity, reflected back to us in the form of an icon that she holds dear. McCloud says "our identities and awareness are invented in many inanimate objects every day" (38). They are important to us in ways we often don't consciously think about. Our clothes, our hair, our choice of music, the places we live, the Chaco's on our feet, or the choice to forgo footwear entirely all add up to our identity, or some version of it.

The camera, prose and music all allow us to extend beyond mere words into self-expression. That's what multimodal writing is beginning to morph into for me. It is extending the concept of rhetoric beyond the keyboard. Indeed, it can be a powerful tool, as when the music swells in Savannah's piece and I get hit with a bit of nostalgia for my current hometown. The sun sets on another beautiful day and we're grateful for every second of it!

A Video About Sidewalks

This is a video about sidewalks. I know, not very sexy, but I thought it would be interesting. Indeed, it was way more interesting than I thought it would be. I could have made a miniseries out of all the information I've collected! I'll spare you that, though. Hope you enjoy the 2 1/2 minutes worth.

Changing Behavior

Design can be powerful. It influences all kinds of behaviors. I like Godin's humorous reference to all the signage. We often never think about what these signs make us do. We stop at stop signs, we park elsewhere when it says "No Parking." We generally obey blindly because, well, if someone spent the time to make a sign for it, it must be serious, right? In effect, they can change our behavior, a notion also brought up by Thomas Goetz in his TedMed talk. But as Godin pointed out, there are some signs that are silly and/or are designed poorly. The point he was trying to make, I believe, is that these signs must be well designed in order to attract the attention that you want. They have to be user-friendly and designed with the end user in mind. As Goetz pointed out, it's not the doctors that must ultimately change their behavior. It is the patient, and the average person understands their medical charts about as well as an IRS 1040 form - in other words, not at all.

So what is it about design that makes us sit up and pay attention? Well, I believe it's the thought process behind the design process. When you really take the time to think about who will be using the sign or document or beer can (or whatever) then you are asking questions like "what would the consumer want?" Medical charts really are a great example. They show you everything, but they tell you nothing. They're full of information, just nothing that anyone without a medical degree can interpret. The designer asks questions like "what can I do to motivate someone to change their behavior?" Obviously, numbers and doctor babble doesn't do much for the average American.

It's funny, most of our lives we take for granted that designers have created the world around us: architects, engineers, advertisers, the idiot that designed this crappy office chair I'm sitting in...  For good or ill, we live in a world that is mostly guided by someone else's hand. Yet we rarely think about it. Even the computer screens we are staring at have been been touched by probably dozens of designers.

So what about the design of text? Bernhardt gives a good example of what he calls "visual syntax" (72) with the wetlands document. He says that the organization of such text "conveys information to the reader about textual organization through visible means" (73). I think what that means is that the design itself is rhetorical. By bolding or highlighting or making a word a different color, textual designers are saying "hey, this is important," or "we're deviating from block paragraphs here because this is a separate thought from this." I suppose that paragraphs themselves were some of the first textual design elements. So it's not the text itself that is manipulating the reader, but the design of the text - how white space (or whatever color background) interacts with the text to create additional meaning.

sensingarchitecture.com

I was fascinated by this gestalt theory - some of the laws which guide design.  According to Bernhardt, they are:

• how the total document impacts a reader visually
• continuation - the idea that text is lines on a background and that our eye moves across the page in a certain way
• closure - the fact that we as humans like to fill in the gaps and so how text is contrasted against its environment is important
• similarity - objects that are similar in shape, size, etc. are considered part of a cohesive group

I found this article on gestalt, which may or may not help you put it into context. Stutz adds the idea that "perceptual grouping is favored according to the nearness of parts. Closer parts form groups by visually uniting" (http://EzineArticles.com/3822562). In other words, if something is next to something else, you associate them or think they are parts of the whole.

I also found it interesting that the design goes way beyond typeface and textual styling. How text is presented is also part of the design process. Sometimes traditional paragraphs are the best way to convey an idea. Sometimes it's a question and answer format. Sometimes sentence fragments are the best way to convey your message. Especially in today's social media dominated world, even the smallest fragment can have a huge impact. The way we play with text these days might have been blasphemy 100 years ago. But today it's all part of how we communicate.

iBlog? My Proposal

"I blog, you blog. We blog. Maybe we should get together and be...a...blogging team." - Blogger Pickup Line. Sorry, that was terrible.

I’ve never blogged, except for when it’s required for school. And I’ve never followed a blog. I think blogging is silly to be honest. Though I have found some useful information on blogs, I’ve never said, “wow, this is really great stuff and I’d really like to read this kind of stuff every day (or week, or month).” I honestly don’t have time in my busy reading schedule to follow what some schmo is doing with his life. To me, the whole concept of blogging sounds like a waste of time. Besides, it’s way overdone. 

But there are some bloggers who have created fairly successful followings. And there definitely are some blogs that draw a lot of random traffic. Bloggers who tackle technical questions or those who can provide a keen insight into something fairly unknown have become part of a new kind of discourse community. It is a fickle one. There are no subscriptions, no coffee table to lay their work down on and pick it back up later. Bloggers must be at the top of their game and their content must be relevant to their audience. It must be able to hold attention and motivate the reader to scroll down the page, click through to other pages and ultimately get the reader to come back again and again. 

Most people don’t just happen onto a blog. It is usually the content that brings them there. Keywords and targeted advertising is what generates traffic and, ultimately, followers. But how does one achieve success in the world of the blog? Is there some magic formula? What blogging platform should you use? What should I write about? How often do I need to update it? How much time should I spend on each blog post? Should I advertise? What about social media? Seriously, is my grandma the only one that’s ever going to read my blog???

There is a ton of information on the web about blogs and what it takes to create a successful blog. In fact, several blogs address this issue. Imagine that!! What I’d like to do is whittle away at these resources and come up with maybe 4 or 5 key aspects of a successful blog so that I can share those with my classmates. I may never make a dime on blogging, but perhaps someone in this class might. And who knows, perhaps I might unlock some mystery within the blog that will motivate me to follow a blog or start my own. If nothing else, I think it will give me some insight into the present and future of writing and what our modern audience is looking for. 

By the way, I ripped off that pickup line in the opening. It's from Better Off Dead. I couldn't find that scene, but here's another gem: