Reflection Post

              In response to the prompt the most useful thing I've learned in class is how to write a paper. Coming from a high school that was very sports oriented there was little focus on academics. One of my peers was even misleadingly dubbed "mentally handicapped"  by the school so he could wrestle. As he had failed to meet the  minimum grade  eligibility requirement. Needless to say I didn't write many papers in high school except for the occasional 2-3 pager and before college I'd never even written an in text citation, something I became  very self conscious about. On top of this general low quality of teaching was my girlfriends public rape trial which I was also attending in her support. Occasionally certain teachers wouldn't allow me to make up assignments I had missed due to the trial. Some even held grudges against me for attending it. This is because the man who had raped my girlfriend was a teacher at my high school as well as the 9news coach of the year for 2010. It was common knowledge to the students that the teacher was sleeping with students but when the administration became aware of the issue they chose to cover it up. Some of the students brought the cover up to the medias attention and the man is now serving a potential life sentence. The administration still runs the school but is facing a very large lawsuit. I feel by now this is pretty obvious but I'll emphasize again that I didn't have much of a high school academic career. This made coming to a prestigious school like the University of Denver a bit intimidating to me and I worried if I would be "less educated" than my peers. I showed up in the fall and have found out that I was right. Most of my peers attended private schools and came in with college credit from AP and IB classes. I attended a public school and came in with no college credit. I have told professor Leake and my peers bits and pieces of this story before but I've yet to explain the whole thing. I guess this in part due to my own insecurities. I knew little of how to write a paper before professor Leake's class and I'm still learning, but arent we all? I cannot say the class has transformed me into an amazing writer but I am a better one. Professor Leakes methods of peer review and general paper revision helped me helped me open up to criticism. I was never singled out in any way or made fun of for what I my "lack of education." Professor Leake's class provided a comfortable environment for growth and helped me learn how to become a better writer. I know my writing could still use a lot of work and I'm terrible at elaborating on topics but I still feel I have made an immense amount of progress in my writing and I can honestly say I've tried my hardest. I know I have a long way to go but this class has been an invaluable opportunity to me. So thank you professor Leake for a wonderful class and for sharing your insight. It has truly been a pleasure.

Thank you,
        Sean Duncan (aka the kid who didn't know what an in-text citation was)

Life of a news story rough draft (no conclusion)

On April 5^th, 2010 a site known as wikileaks, infamous for releasing classified material to the public, published a video of two American army apache helicopters opening fire on a dozen innocent citizens in the city of New Baghdad, Iraq. Among the victims were 6 men, two Reuters news staff members named Saeed Chmagh and Namir Noor-Eldeen, as well as two children. The News reporters were killed along with the other 6 adults and the two children were severely wounded and sent to an Iraqi hospital. The instance itself occurred on July 12^th, 2007 and was pursued heavily by Reuters in an attempt to find out what happened to their reporters. Reuters tried to obtain the video under the Freedom of Information act in 2007 but failed. When Wikileaks released the video under the title “Collateral Murder” a worldwide controversy began over the actions of the pilots and their potential violations of the Rules of Engagement and immediately sides were taken. The main points of controversy in the 39 minutes of unedited footage are in regards to a camera, a van, and the diction of the pilots.

The media became a political battleground with sources like rightpolitics.net (a large Jewish Conservative website) offering politically charged statements like “Liberal fucktards, to liberals and all those who slander the military, every death is murder, and every soldier is suspect.” The Guardian, MSNBC and The Huffington Post all took the sides of the victims and, in their articles about the video, spoke very harshly against the actions of the soldiers while on the other hand The Weekly Standard, NY Times, and the Jewish conservatives took their stance and offered their sympathy towards the troops.

The van that was a major point of controversy was being driven by two men attempting  to collect the wounded and dead when the helicopters opened fire on the van and the unarmed men despite identifying the two children in the back of the van. The Huffington post criticized this portion of the video and a pilot heavily when he was quoted as saying “Well, it’s their fault bringing their kids to a battle” while the right side and the weekly standard called the van “fair game even if the men weren’t armed.”

The dialogue between the pilots was also a large factor as to why stances were taken in this issue. The dialogue can be seen as questionable to say the least and provides insight as to what the pilots were thinking. It was extremely interesting to see how the soldiers’ intentions came into question mainly due to their conversation. It was easy to tell certain things were taken out of context in certain articles in order to cater to a sources motives. The Huffington post for example used a quote from one of the pilots that read “come on let us shoot” and described the pilot as “bloodthirsty.”  The tonality of the text also helped add cues as to which direction these variables swayed the story. For example, sources that sided more with the soldiers, such as the NY Times, described the reporters and other adults that were killed as “insurgents,” whereas those that took the “insurgents” side chose instead to describe them as “victims.” So Samuel Harris’ themes of purpose, audience, and author do apply here. The bias created by an author does in fact manifest a purpose behind the story and in fact, that bias is generally directed for a specific audience.

The camera being carried by the Reuters camera men Chmagh and Eldeen was supposedly mistaken by the pilots as an RPG (Rocket Propelled Grenade) and was thus, supposedly, seen as a threat. The point brought up by those criticizing the Pilot was that he was viewing the situation in full color, not black and white like in the video, and was clearly able to identify the camera despite what his descriptions to his superiors stated. This point surprisingly wasn’t discussed much in the mainstream media when compared to the destruction of the van but it dominated the comments sections of every article. Everywhere comments flared up from both sides attacking and condemning one another, but these comments were not useless contradiction. The people that commented were insightful in their postings. One poster by the username of Sean6399 wrote “Anyway, the callous disregard for human life exhibited by the soldiers may be disturbing­, but it should not be surprising­. That mental attitude towards "the enemy" is cultivated in military culture. It is necessary, because it's rather difficult to motivate soldiers to stick their bayonets in fellow humans that they feel empathy towards.”

These ideas are shared in the comments sections and forums of every article and viewpoints and opinions exhibit strong emotions. In this enviroment sharing of information occurs between all of those involved. What this means is that people are learning, discussing, and thus cultivating more accurate and truthful stories than before. The collective is now overtaking the mainstream media. 60 years ago the only way to receive news was through picking up a newspaper but with the technological advancements of communicational devices information is more readily available than ever. Now anyone can make information public through the Internet at any point in time they choose. People are becoming informed through sources other than the mainstream media and this story is also proof of that fact. When examining the dates of the articles published the smaller blogs had first heard of this story, it then spread to the Huffington Post and The Weekly Standard and they published articles the day the video was released on April 5^th, 2010. The NY times and MSNBC were both a day late and reported their first stories on the subject on April 6^th, 2010.

In my personal opinion I believe that the pilots in this situation were aware of their actions. This appears to me to be a blatant misuse of force. It is astonishing to see media sources like the Weekly Standard defend the atrocious actions of these troops and call this gruesome video a “sensational gimmick that succeeded in driving tons of media attention and traffic to wikileaks site.” It seems that the followers of these sources have not watched the video for themselves. The video highlights the tragic, gruesome, and often times merciless nature of war. It shows two pilots murdering  nearly a dozen innocent civilians by misrepresenting the situation to their superiors. The fact the media can even label these victims as “insurgents” makes me sick to the core. It is important though to show how information can be kept secret from the public and more importantly how incredible powerful the collective is becoming. Groups like Anonymous and the 99% are growing like wildfire  and are becoming so incredibly advanced that they can hacking government databases. Anonymous is even said to be approaching the point where they could hack into the power grid. We are in a time where the truth has become a powerful weapon of exploitation and the people are sick of being lied to and so citizens have developed ways to uncover the truth. 

Taking an Approach

I would describe Joseph Harris' "taking an approach" as transforming one thing into another. There is a retention of material but the external form may change. Harris says it's when "The original does not go away but is remade into something new." The NY Times and the blog I have been following, young entrepreneur can be seen as "taking an approach" because they both rewrite stories with that can change the context of the original story. Certain bias sways everything one way or another and these stories are "transformed" essentially into entirely new stories. They retain the same fundamental building blocks but as a whole the stories have been changed. This makes it easy to see the potential corruption of the truth due to these motivated manipulations of the truth. Smaller companies and blogs may tend to agree with certain larger news corporations and so may acknowledge them in some way. Harris spoke about this as one of the three strategies of "taking an approach." These strategies are acknowledging influences, turning an approach on itself, and reflexivity. Generally these terms are all forms of "mirroring" other writers. It seems to be a form of agreement between writers through text and can be seen as a form of ideological alliance. Look at how many times Shakespeare’s plays have been redone for a perfect example of changing the context of a text while still retaining the plot, aka "taking an approach." This is exactly the same thing that news sources do when they write stories.

Rewrite

My experience reading the NY times has been a terrible one. In fact, I'd even say I grieve doing it. Every morning I have to wake up an hour and a half before class and read the news. I find most of the stories negative and depressing, especially the ones about foreign policy. I find there is a small bias in the NY times occasionally but for the most part it is a very reliable news source. Recently I have been reading a lot about the problems in Syria and the middle east. The controversy around this region is incredible right now and with Russia and China petitioning the UN security councils call for peace Syria has gained international backing. I am intrigued to see how the UN will respond to this. The middle east seems to be at a cultural turning point which is why I am so interested in the region. As far as my literacy habits are concerned I really feel as though they have changed an incredible amount for the wrong reasons. In general however I feel keeping up with current events is a great depressive detriment to society and the individual. You can read about anything in a newspaper and the wide range of topics covered allows for a very wide demographic, that is, if you enjoy reading about starving children as you sip your morning coffee and eat that oh so delicious bagel. Recently I read a blog post from one of my peers from China regarding the cultural differences between China and the US and the difference in work ethic between the two countries. Hearing her perspective on the issue was a bit odd at first but overall enlightening. This event brought to light the reality of the stories I read about every day and the important nature of them all. Reading her post made me realize that these events aren’t just stories from a far-away land but that real people are going through these events. So in some ways the news is important, however, it still does not change the tone of the reports. People simply don't want to hear about depressing things. 




I rewrote and revised this argument from a pro news stance to a more negative news stance. I attempted to do this by changing keywords throughout the passage. What was originally "Crucial" became "Important" and occasionally I replaced certain sentences as well. The important part to me was that the story's essence remained constant in both passages. 

Countering

Harris's idea of "countering" can be seen as a point of divergence between two writers. Harris does however clarify that countering is not in fact a form of nullification but a suggestion to a different way of thinking. He coins the phrases "yes, but..." and "on the other hand" as examples of countering. He says that there are three main ways to create the divergence point needed in order to counter an argument. These ways include arguing the other side, uncovering values, and dissenting. Oddly enough I couldn't find an example of countering in recent blog posts in young entrepreneur. Most articles are more about the forwarding and relay of new information as opposed to the countering of other data or information. The lack of "countering" in the site might also be due to the quantitative nature of economics and business that makes up the entire subject content of the site. Statistics leads little room for speculation based opinions other than in regards to their validity so it only makes sense that their is few "countering" blog posts. There are examples of "countering" in the sites articles but as far as my understanding goes this post was only analyzing blog posts. After having read this portion of "rewriting" I will say that I was enlightened to how many news sources use "countering."  Every political news source offers some wonderful example of "countering" and many political figureheads also "counter" their opponents opinions on a regular basis. This example also shows the intentions of writers may lead them to leave out, alter, or misuse information. As a politician might disregard a major counterargument a writer may also disregard information in order to prove his or her point. As a whole "Countering" still leads to the uncovering of truths but is much more subject to corruption than "forwarding."

Forwarding

     Harris's definition of forwarding is described by him as "moving bits of text and paper around." A writer, Harris argues, "Forwards" when he or she takes pieces of text or images and uses them in a new context. This is as Harris calls it, a circulatory system of information that, while maintaining the same fundamental elements, still provides for a wide range of twist in a story. Harris explains how there are at least four ways of "forwarding" which are illustrating, authorizing, borrowing, and extending. In the young entrepreneur blog I have been following I have noticed every story comes from forwarding. In fact Young Entrepreneur writes all of its articles based off of other websites and news sources. It is astounding to see how the usage of "forwarding" has increased as information becomes more readily and instantly available. It is also surprising to see how apparent "forwarding" is in blogs. It seems as though because blogs are much more opinion based they tend to have more "forwarding" in them, quite possibly due to the informal nature of blogs. There is a spin on every blog post and on an individual level blogs should be questioned for their bias and validity. However our society has reached a point where the wide variety of opinions has allowed the discovery of new truths in stories and, as a collective whole, the blogosphere is incredibly accurate. It literally can be viewed as millions of detectives trying to understand new stories and clues to the truth. And as time has told truths have been discovered thanks to the likes of the blogosphere. One example is the recent Arab Spring in the Middle East that was mainly driven by the media and the blogosphere. Images of the devastation were shot out worldwide in every direction and in a matter of minutes people were becoming aware of the event. Throughout the internet opinions were being injected into the internet and soon enough the forwarding of information had caused a revolution. So although certain things about a narrative are altered on an individual scale as a whole the different methods of forwarding help produce a more accurate and concise presentation of the narrative.

Rhetorical Analysis

Young Entrepreneur is aimed largely at, well, young entrepreneurs. It targets a demographic of innovative small business owners and entrepreneurs and its stories mainly cover economic and political issues and its bias seems to sway a little bit to the right. The site also pushes many innovative business ideas that cover all areas of the field such as marketing and management.

NY times comparison

In regards to the comparison of the NY times and the blog I have been reading, young entrepreneur, the similarities of interconnectedness are many. The press sphere is apparent in both news sources because both sites bring about a sense of connectedness to the world. Just by signing into the internet it seems like you could travel anywhere on the internet just by following different links and advertisements. I do agree with Jarvis when he speaks about how the press sphere has changed and I think these two sources are perfect examples of that evolution. The similarities between news stories covered in the two sources also help to prove this point. The narratives of the stories themselves are essentially identical in both sources but the bias of both sources adds different tones to the readings. The young entrepreneur blog is a bit more, as you would’ve guessed, economic focused. And so the stories tend to be a little more on the fiscally conservative side while the NY times tends to swing a little bit to the left. 

Blog to follow

The blog I have decided to follow is the young entrepreneur blog (youngentrepreneur.com/blog/). I chose this blog simply because it interests me. I enjoy reading about economics and small businesses and so I looked up what good blogs were out there for that general subject area. After browsing through a couple of sites I found this blog.

Jarvis

In his article “the press becomes the press sphere” Jarvis speaks of how our news, and our process of receiving news about the world around us, has drastically changed. He makes the argument that instead of receiving news only from the press we are now receiving it from sources all around us. These sources include peers, media, and search engines. Not everyone sits down and watches the news like they used too but virtually everyone does have a cell phone or computer. Because we are surrounded daily by these technologies we receive news at the touch of a button and so we are constantly trying to stay informed. I agree with Jarvis and how he has said our process of receiving news has changed. It is an astounding thing that humanities technology is at the point where it is and we ought to be more grateful for our daily luxuries and amenities. I too have found myself surrounded by technology and therefor information. As I sit here on Saturday morning I am watching TV next to my cell phone while on my computer. I have also visited facebook twice in the past five minutes while writing this. Now look around yourself and see what you can find. Jarvis’s argument is well articulated and well presented. There is, however, a slightly confusing diagram Jarvis presents of the “new news process” that sort of disrupts and confuses his logic. The diagram seems messy and odd but somehow leads into his next diagram decently well, covering the unorganized diagram. Overall though the logical design is there and Jarvis makes an extremely convincing argument.

The NY times

My experience reading the NY times has been a great one. In fact, I'd even say I look forward to it. Every morning I wake up an hour and a half before class and read the news. I find most of the stories intriguing, especially the ones about foreign policy. I find there is a small bias in the NY times occasionally but for the most part it is a very reliable news source. Recently I have been reading a lot about the problems in Syria and the middle east. The controversy around this region is incredible right now and with Russia and China petitioning the UN security councils call for peace Syrian blood is now on their hands. I am intrigued to see how the UN will respond to this. The middle east seems to be at a cultural turning point which is why I am so interested in the region. As far as my literacy habits are concerned I don't really feel as though they have changed that much but I read the NY times daily before the class as well. In general however I feel keeping up with current events greatly benefits ones literacy habits and their overall general knowledge of the world. You can read about anything in a newspaper and the wide range of topics covered allows for a very wide demographic. Recently I read a blog post from one of my peers from China regarding the cultural differences between China and the US and the difference in work ethic between the two countries. Hearing her perspective on the issue was a bit odd at first but overall enlightening. This event brought to light the reality of the stories I read about every day and the crucial nature of them all. Reading her post made me realize that these events aren’t just stories from a far-away land but that real people are going through these events. People in the Middle East are pouring their blood onto the streets while at home we are anxiously anticipating who will be the next leader of the free world. Her narrative truly brings into light the seemingly miniscule individual struggle s of these epic and awe inspiring events.

News sources

In general I have found my classmates all have at least 2 or 3 sources of news. Most of my peers read the NY times and also keep up with social networking sites (also a source for news). It is extremely interesting to me however that a great number of my peers list the daily show with Jon Stewart and The Colbert report as news sources when in reality they are intended to be more comedic  than anything. It is sad to see people using these shows as credible news sources. As I previously stated however my peers generally keep up with current events. The rapid rate of information transferal allows us to keep up in a globalizing world which is a blessing for humanity. This is a blessing because  it allows the truth to be uncovered and be uncovered quickly. Groups like Anonymous even pride themselves on the truth and the end of corruption in government. We read and write more than ever to keep up with the outside world and so the opinions of Carr and Hedges I feel are both pessimistic and obscene. It is hard for me to believe that technology is a burden to our society given all the benefits it has granted us. Everything has their positives and negatives but the positives, in this scenario, definitely outweigh the negatives.

News

My main news sources are Time, NY times, CNN, MSNBC, and FOX. I feel like I keep up with news a bit better than most college students but my major (public policy) sort of requires me too. I try to use as many news sources as I can in order to understand the truth of the story as well as analyze the bias in every news source. I also receive news from sources like facebook and twitter but this of course is more personal news. By keeping up with these sources I feel as though I keep up with the workings of society fairly well. I do watch the daily show with Jon Stewart but I do not consider that a relevant news source for that was never the shows intention, it is quite funny though. I do use the news sources I refrenced to read about different issues. Generally speaking I read Time to learn about new technological advances and medical breakthroughs. The NY times has become my go to for foreign policy and standard world news because of this class and information from CNN is relatively unbiased in the grand conglomeration of terrible news sources. This of course leads me to my next source which is Fox News. Now before I continue I do watch Fox to hear about GOP candidates and Democratic faults but to be honest I find it more entertaining than anything. To me it brings about a vague remembrance of some terribly dramatic reality show…need I say Jersey shore? Maybe this is why so many teenagers are swayed by its dramatic charm.

Extended Essay

Extended Essay #1

By Sean Duncan

In the past 50 or so years the ways in which we communicate with one another have drastically changed. New amenities like smart phones and iPod’s are revolutionizing the tech industry as well as the way we read, write, and think. The old ways of Shakespearean language are becoming outdated and replaced by text slang and the usage of cursive is becoming rarer and rarer but in layman’s terms our society is changing and it’s changing at a rapid rate. Some people who grew up a mere half century ago are having problems working some modern everyday communicational technologies. However, this profound evolution of our communicational vehicles may not necessarily be a negative thing in the grand scheme of societal progression. In fact it may be quite the opposite and technological innovation may be steering our world in a new, brighter direction.

Throughout history communication has proven to be ever-changing in nature from the very beginnings of humanity to ordinary modern day life. Ancestors of old used to communicate through hieroglyphics on cave walls, people started using a telephone in 1876, and now electronic devices reign supreme in this continually globalizing world.

Time has become crucial in today’s busy society, in fact, a study done by ABC news shows that only four out of every ten adults even takes the tame to eat breakfast. If people today don’t even have the time to eat breakfast when would they have the time to read a book? The sad fact is that the majority of people just simply don’t have the time to sit down and read a 300 page novel so we find ways to summarize what we read. It’s also probably arguable that we summarize other parts of our lives as well. Our society has pushed the idea that time is money and with the present day economy money is hard to come by. We fill our days with 9 to 5 work schedules; some of us even work another job or attend school. This progressive busyness has led to an incredibly information hungry society. Just like the computers we own and find ourselves plugged into for hours on end were constantly taking in data sourced from the world around us. All the things we touch, see, and smell are processed through our head at a rapid rate and, like a computer, we seek more upgrades. We all want to be smarter, faster, and better than everybody else because everyone is trying to be the top dog in today’s highly competitive world. A Baccalaureate degree ten years ago would get a decent job but is now considered a minimal educational degree in the job market. The market has evolved, as have we.

The most astounding part of our species is our incredible ability to adapt to whatever our surroundings are and not only just survive in those conditions but to learn to thrive as individuals. Humanity has always invented things in order to thrive and progress but inventions become outdated and new technological advances replace the old ones. If this is true then the devices we create for communication are developed with specific pre-planned goals in mind. The ideological aim of a communicational vehicle is to provide instant, readily available, and precise information at any place in existence. Humanity creates these devices because old ones are no longer sufficient and the people’s needs have changed. The technology has not changed us, we have changed the technology. The world itself is becoming a faster place and we need communicational devices that can keep up with this fast pace world while retaining the ability to be accurate. Now with the conception and production of 3G networks the digital world is instantly available to practically anyone. The internet has made contact maintainable anywhere in the world but it isn’t the devices that lead to the changes in our reading and writing habits. In fact it seems that our literary changes have brought about these new vehicles.  

There are multiple reasons as to why we should use technology to help develop our literacy habits. Text on the internet for example is a newer technology that has benefited our society in many ways. For one, reading text online allows readers to choose what they want to read. Although some people see this as a downfall it actually promotes reading in the sense that it spikes the readers interest level and allows for what is called “Reader Freedom.” This can be described as the ability for the reader to not just pick and choose what he or she wants to read but also the rate at which that information is available. The more information that’s available the more freedom the reader has and the more interested in the subject he or she will become. Some opponents to this idea may say that it doesn’t increase the reader’s “broad general knowledge”. In theory this isn’t a bad thing either. By allowing a reader to hone in and focus on one particular issue that reader can become an expert in that specific field of study. An old quote by the famous author Maya Angelou reads “You can only become truly accomplished at something you love. Don’t make money your goal. Instead pursue the things you love doing and then do them so well that people can’t take their eyes off of you.” This form of being is one we should encourage. This is the sort of literary habit that should be common in our highly sophisticated present day society.

Also, people with disabilities like cataracts and other form of visual impairments can now have internet text pages read aloud to them via computer software. This allows them to enjoy the same instant access to information everyone else has that would otherwise be inaccessible or at least more costly time-wise, and as we have already established, time is everything in our society. Technology is also beneficial to students without disabilities as well. In a study completed by Helen S. Kim and Michael L. Kamil from Stanford University they discovered that computers are extremely useful in the field of reading instruction. The essay argues that technology can help improve “reading, writing, second-language learners, and at-risk learners. One of the claims made explains how multimedia presentations “improve retention and comprehension of information” through the use of “dynamic visual information with text.” This is just one of the many ways technology can aid us in improving our literacy skills.

Advances are being made in literally every field of study. The cars we drive are becoming more faster and more fuel efficient. Medical advances are curing diseases thought at one point to be incurable. We are beginning to explore the outer reaches of existence and at the same time examining the smallest of molecules. All of these are helping us to understand the world better and all of these incredible human feats seem almost natural. It’s almost as if nature intended it to be this way. So why go to a library to find an article when they’re readily available online? Instead we can explore new avenues of study with the aid of technology in order to accomplish goals such as curing disease, poverty, and corruption. We are not becoming “less intelligent,” in fact I’d say our society is becoming more and more intelligent. According to futurists the merging of what is artificial and what is organic will occur and the line between the two will be blurred. If this is so then maybe our society will also change from this mechanical, corrupt structure, to a harmoniously coexisting state. As a whole we might one day solve these problems in order to better humankind. After all this is all speculation and as history has taught us the future can be quite unpredictable but as Malcolm X said “The future belongs to those who prepare for it today.” So what’s the harm in trying?

My experiences blogging

At first I was skeptical of the thought of a blog simply due to its "journalistic" nature and no man wants to say he owns a journal. I can say now that I see the appeal. I understand now how people can become enveloped in blogs but I cant say I'm one of those people. I have found these assignments to be quite difficult to keep up with as far as post deadlines go and I am still trying to catch up on response posts. Overall I feel this experience has actually turned me off to blogging in that sense. I feel I have spent an enormous time writing about my experiences and telling them to other people about them, something I feel is almost like bragging. I would much rather be enjoying my time rather than writing about it. I don't totally feel as though my attitudes toward reading and writing have changed much during the blogging process. I will say I have learned to respect bloggers a whole lot more though because let me tell you this stuff is hard. The difficulty level comes from the pressing and fast paced nature of blogging. It’s a constant pressure to stay on time and, to be entirely honest, I’ve felt a lot of the pressure myself. It also feels competitive in nature as all of my peers can see my writing and I can see theirs. As I read their posts I’m consistently wondering how I compare to them, whether that’s for better or for worse I don’t know. I don’t think I’ll continue to blog after this assignment is finished but it has humbled me

RE: "Literacy in Three metaphors"

In her essay "Literacy in three metaphors" Scribner explains how literacy cannot be defined because it has so many different levels and meanings. In search to capture the "essence" of what literacy is Scribner uses three metaphors: literacy as adaptation, literacy as power, and literacy as a state of grace. She also dives into how literacy affects society and how literacy can differ between societies. She uses the metaphor of literacy as adaptation  to "capture concepts of literacy that emphasize its survival or pragmatic value." I agree with her view as I too believe literacy has and will continue to adapt as our societies evolve and grow. When she explains the state of power she sees it as a "relationship between literacy and group or community advancement." She even goes into examples of elitist societies in order to prove her point. Lastly she describes the state of grace "as salvation" in the sense that it holds special properties but Scribner warns her metaphor should not take on a religious connotation and she states the potential inaccuracy of her third and final metaphor. It is also intriguing to examine her ideas as to how literacy has been defined by different societies. I agree with most of Scribner’s comments on the “essence” of literacy and also wonder how this may be applied to education. Her story as to why she pursued this question of “what is literacy?” was extremely interesting and her experiences with the Vai were thought-provoking. She seemed to have a much more positive outlook on Literacy as opposed to Carr and Hedges. Her rhetoric seemed optimistic and refreshing. I do not think that there is any pressing literary concerns because I agree that literacy is ever-changing in nature.

Post 7 "Hedges"

In his article “America the illiterate” Hedges spins his article into a politically fueled rampage about societal and governmental distrust. Hedge’s even goes as far as to make an allusion to Aldous Huxley’s “A brave New World.” This allusion seems to be a bit extreme in the context of the original argument about illiteracy in America. He also presents statistics regarding literacy rates that seemed extremely questionable. I find it extremely hard to believe a third of Americas population is “illiterate or barely literate.” Both Carr and Hedges seem to be very scared of the coming future and with rate of progression who can blame them? There is one looming factor that both authors seem to ignore and that is humanity.  We invent things in order to benefit ourselves as well as society. I would hope that by the time humanity can cure disease we might also have the intellectual capability to formulate our own opinions and make decisions for ourselves. Hedged could also be wrong and America might not be that illiterate after all. Maybe instead the world is merely changing the way information is received and processed. The digital age is transforming our society but let us remain “open minded” as Hedges put it, to all possible outcomes so that we may further our understanding of the way informational vehicles such as the internet adapt to the needs of humanity. The beauty of our species is that we have the ability to adapt and so we will continue to create inventions that meet our continually changing needs. I guess what I see in both Carr and Hedges is an inherent lack of faith in humanity. In my eyes humanity is the only thing I see having faith in. 

"Is Google Making Us Stupid?"

In his article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” Nicholas Carr speaks poorly about the horrors of technological progression. His closing statement reads “as we come to rely on computers to mediate our understanding of the world, it is our own intelligence that flattens into artificial intelligence.” Carr fails to recognize how informational accessibility leads to an expansion in creativity in society. By looking toward the future we can begin to see a generation whose digital lives greatly influence their everyday lives. This is not necessarily a bad thing when you consider how intelligent our society is becoming. In life everything is ever-changing and so is intelligence. What we considered “smart” in the 50’s is not what we consider “smart” to be today. Now in colleges students learn about Nano technology and petroleum engineering as opposed to English or math. This is because of how easy information is to access. Why waste our time memorizing random senseless facts when we can pull up information on a smart phone. This is the same thing myself and my peers did in order to complete this assignment. Why go to a library to find an article when theyre readily available online? Instead we can explore new avenues of study in order to accomplish goals such as curing disease, poverty, and corruption. We are not becoming “less intelligent,” in fact I’d say our society is becoming more and more intelligent. According to futurists the merging of what is artificial and what is organic will occur and the line between the two will be blurred. If this is so then maybe our society will also change from this mechanical corrupt structure to a harmoniously coexisting being. As a whole we might one day solve these problems in order to better humankind. After all this is all speculation and as history has taught us the future can be quite unpredictable but as Malcolm X said “The future belongs to those who prepare for it today.” So what’s the harm in trying?

Post 5

In his book Harris seems to take a similar approach to Sullivan as far as their theories on reading and writing. Harris speaks about how reading is more than just understanding an authors ideas, it’s also about reacting to the text and formulating questions and ideas in your own mind. A rhetorical conversation in your head is really what Harris is trying to get at. Harris really wants the reader to fully engage and understand a text before breaking it down and using it in his or her own work. To me this is also what Sullivan wanted to accomplish with his work in the sense that he speaks so highly of “conversation” and its importance. Whether it is writing or reading this connection between the author and reader must be kept in mind. The text is essentially a medium through which one person shares his or her ideas with another person. Both people must communicate and “converse” through the text and therefor expand on the text itself.  The authors both want us to converse with them just in different ways. To Harris the setting should be a bit more formal and to Sullivan the informal nature of his blogging is key to his success but both authors seek the same outcome. A sort of meet and greet with you, the reader, and the text is the dinner table. 

More on internet usage #4

After reading some of my peers notes on internet usage I have realized that the internet has become a regular part of daily life. We are consistently checking sites like facebook, youtube, and hotmail throughout the course of a day. It seemed most everyone was one of these sites multiple times a day (facebook being the most visited). It’s also pretty amazing to see that most people check the news more than once a day using a website of his or her choice. Information like the news is becoming more and more readily available due to the advancement of technology. Things like smartphones and 4g have made communication instantaneous and precise which is also why the elapsed time someone spends on one website is so small. My peers generally spent under 30 minutes on a single website. I do not however think this is a bad thing. The progression of technology will continue to make communication easier for all of us. Our lives are already interrupted by things that were mere ideas years ago such as text messages, phone calls, and twitter updates. Ever wonder what will happen next? I sure do but I won’t try and predict anything. I will say that this progression in communication is allowing our society to grow at an astounding rate and that we now depend upon these means of communication almost as a necessity. We cling to our phones and computers as if they are our lifelines not because they are but because we put tremendous value on the information we receive from them. As far as I’m concerned the more information something receives the smarter it becomes

Internet Usage Post #3

After having logged 2 days worth of information on my internet usage it is quite apparent that I use my internet mainly for school. The only websites I have visited are facebook (20minutes total), Time (70 min), NY times (30 min), webcentral (45 min), and this one (15 min). Unfortunately I haven't had much time to "browse the web" but I'm honestly not too disappointed. I'd rather be hiking or doing some form of outdoor activity. I feel most people take for granted what’s outside of the digital world and all too often we get caught in a digital trap of sorts. Although the internet is great as a learning tool I feel it can also be a massive and addictive waste of time. Ask any college student how many times they've visited stumbleupon in a class. However on the flip side I would also ask that same college student how much he’s learned at stubleupon vs. what he has learned in class, you might find the answers surprising and interesting to note. Being a college student I can honestly say stumbleupon was much more informative than some of my general, boring classes. I do believe the internet itself is an astounding tool and should be used as such but there is also an incredibly large amount of irrelevant or even wrong information that is being spread around like wildfire. The manipulation of information is probably one of my largest fears simply because the use of language make anyone believe anything. Yes, even you and me.

On Andrew Sullivans "Why I blog"

After having read Andrew Sullivan’s “Why I Blog” I feel Sullivan’s main reason as to why he blogs is because he finds it authentic and honest. He says that blogging is “A conversation, rather than a production.” It is the true integrity of conversation that he finds important and enjoyable in blogging. He has a connection with his readers that’s more personal than a manufactured piece of work. He essentially creates personal relationships with people through his writing and the personality of blogging itself. Sullivan understands this and so he is honest with his words. He also says “You end up writing about yourself, since you are a relatively fixed point in this constant interaction with the ideas and facts of the exterior world.” Again, it’s the authenticity of it all. It’s the elimination of exterior variables that allows for an introspective form of activity that gives one a sense of belonging in the busy and crowded world around us. Sullivan and other bloggers reflect on the world from their perspectives. It allows them to be entirely honest with themselves, something everyone should be able to do. After all its honesty that creates passion. Bruce Lee described this form of authenticity as “honest self-expression” and Maslow regarded it as the top level of his hierarchal system. I believe Sullivan understands this as the root for his passion and it is the main reason as to “Why he blogs.” 

Creating my first blog

I’m sitting on my computer this Sunday morning looking out at the mountains and the world brighten every second from the snow cover from the night before as the sun rises . I chose to write a blog early in the morning simply because I believe the morning is the best time to reflect upon the actions of the past day. Having just created this blog on this wonderful day I can say I was surprised by the ease. Having already had a g-mail account the process was relatively simple and soon enough I had created my first blog. I always said I would never make one because I feel blogs are too close to keeping a journal and being a teenage boy I have rules against those kinds of things. So thanks Professor Leake for making me face my fears. The blog itself was literally a 5 click process, the most difficult thing being the decision of what username to use. It was so easy it put facebooks functionality to shame and left me wondering how fast technology is really advancing. It’s astounding to think that todays senior citizens grew up with virtually none of the technological amenities we have today. Things like computers, xbox’s, and ipods were literally non-existent and as I look out of my window from my desk I wonder if what they say is true. Are we losing our touch with nature? It literally feels like the digital universe is becoming an entirely separate plane of existence. I just created a piece of that existence in two minutes and on the other hand the snow outside is beautiful. I wonder how many people can really see it.