Reflection on Open Letter Draft

The time has finally arrived. For my final blog post I have reflected on my open letter draft as well as included links to the drafts that I peer reviewed.

Lee, See-ming. "“天開 Opening of the sky” / 香港國際機場之寧 Hong Kong International Airport Serenity / SML.20130425.6D.02896". April 25, 2013 via flickr. Attribuition 2.0 Generic License

For the last peer review I conducted in this course, I looked over the drafts of Andrea and Evan.

Did you demonstrate an ability to think about your writing and yourself as a writer?

• After looking over my draft again I believe that I gave a lot of insight into what I think about myself as a writer and my abillity to write. Some topics certainly received more focus than others, like my writing process, while others were barely discussed. I haven't really demonstrated my ability to deal with time management and how this course has impacted me for in the future.

Did you provide analysis of your experiences, writing assignments, or concepts you have learned?

• In my opinion I believe that I provided an adequate analysis of my experiences, writing assignments, and concepts that I have learned. I could have done a better job at transitioning throughout my topics and discussing more about what I will take away from this class in my future careers.

Did you provide concrete examples from your own writing (either quotes from your writing or rich descriptions of your writing process)?

• The presence of concrete examples varied throughout my draft. In some paragraphs I provided excellent examples that really showed my audience what I was trying to explain about my writing process. In other paragraphs, as pointed out by my peers, the hyperlinks I provided didn't seem to be connected and direct quotes would have been more effective.

Did you explain why you made certain choices and whether those choices were effective?

• I explained why I made certain choices, like deciding to post my blogs later in the week, but I failed to explain whether the choices I made were effective. I only skimmed the surface of certain topics and will need to go back and analyze them more in-depth.

Did you use specific terms and concepts related to writing and the writing process?

• Many concepts related to writing and the writing process were used in my draft. I made sure to hit as many elements of the writing process as possible, ranging from the concept of genre to the peer review process and publishing the final draft. The only concept not really discussed was the role that time management plays into the writing process.

Draft of Open Letter

In this post I have addressed what I would appreciate my peers looking for as they review my draft and have provided a hyperlink to my letter.

Shlabotnik, Joe. "Manatee Mailbox". November 19, 2006 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

As always, I would appreciate it if you could let me know if I'm straying from the purpose of this letter. I would also appreciate any suggestions on how to improve my introduction and conclusion because I feel like they are lacking. I am aware that my transitions between paragraphs need work and any suggestions are welcome. Thank you for taking the time to look over my letter!

The rough draft of my letter can be found at this link.

Reflecting More on My Writing Experiences

In this blog post I reflect more on my writing experiences from this semester and what I have learned about myself because of those experiences.

Bodin, Ulf. "Bench". September 9, 2013 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

1. What were the biggest challenges you faced this semester, overall?

• Overall, the biggest challenges I've faced this semester would be learning to adapt to others' time schedules and learning to accept criticism from my peers. Most people liked to push their work back until the night it was due, so I had to adapt to constantly checking in order to find someone's blog to comment on. I've also primarily always reviewed my own work, so learning to accept others opinions was initially a challenge.

2. What did you learn this semester about your own time management, writing and editorial skills?

• This semester has shown me that I do not adapt well to others' time schedules. I am an individual that works much more effectively on her own timeline. I also learned that when I write I tend to deviate from the main point I am trying to make and I ramble instead.

3. What do you know about the concept of 'genre'? Explain how understanding this concept is central to being a more effective writer.

• The concept of 'genre' allows you to identify your audience and create your publishings in a way that suit their needs. By understanding what audience you are addressing you can more effectively suit their needs. Along with understanding their needs, you can more effectively deliver your point by writing in a style that appeals to them. For example, for Project 2 we were tasked with writing about an issue in our major. Our target audience was incoming freshmen in the field, so it was important to avoid jargon they wouldn't understand and to simplify complex ideas in a way that they would be able to understand.

4. What skills from this course might you use and/or develop further in the next few years of college coursework?

• I will further develop my abilities to adequately critique work and accept criticisms from others. I will also actively search for peers to review my work because I have found the process of peer review to be extremely helpful.

5. What was your most effective moment from this semester in 109H?

• This may be biased on my end, but I believe that my most effective moment was when I finally managed to have all of my other blog posts done aside from my draft before the week had even started. It was much less stressful being able to spend all week working on just the draft and not having to worry about doing the other blog posts.

6. What was your least effective moment from this semester in 109H?

• My least effective moment from this semester was when I spent six hours working on an annotated bibliography. This was back for one of the Project 1 deadlines before I realized that amount of effort was not necessary. I could've spent that time working on other parts of the deadline and could have applied more time to homework for my other classes.

Revisiting My Writing Process

The end of the semester is fast approaching, and this post is a bit reminiscent on how I have changed over the course of a few months. Particularly my writing process and time management skills.

Valentin, nicolas. "Seasonal reflection......". October 25, 2008 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

Looking back at my "My Writing Process Post" I can see that very little has changed. I would still identify myself as a mixture between a "Heavy Reviser" and a "Sequential Composer". The biggest thing that has changed for my process, and in my opinion has screwed me up mentally, is my ability to create outlines and edit them. These blog posts with their specific constraints and orders have tampered with how my brain usually flows. It is hard to find the time to create an outline that I enjoy, or find information that would help me even more due to the copious amount of work we were given weekly. I found myself short on time and too stressed to put the necessary effort into these foundational parts of my writing process. I still lean on being a perfectionist, but if college has taught me anything it's that some classes don't have time for that crap. It drives me insane and I often am without my bearings.

Looking back on my "Calendar Reflection" post I find myself saddened. Shortly after school started, maybe a month in, I had to quit my job because the stress from the amount of classwork was impacting my health. For the past 3 months I have spent ~95% of any free time I have doing homework. Literally every time my mom comes into my room she asks if I'm still working on it, and has just gotten into the habit of assuming that I'm always doing it. The workload for this class exceeded anything I could have ever thought, and it is what has taken up most of my time. It is what caused me to have to leave my job and to never have any free time. D: I also knew from the beginning that I would never be able to practice two hours a day, and have elected to drop music for now. There are more important things to focus on at the moment and maybe when I have the time for it again I'll pick it back up. Finishing homework two weeks in advance was not a realistic goal for me because most of the teachers don't keep their assignments updated that far in advance. I was lucky to have work that was posted a week in advanced, so different from high school. I've also learned to spend less time beautifying things, although it drives me crazy because I want everything to be organized and succinct.

Hopefully in any future courses I take that involve writing I will be able to structure things on my own timeline. These weekly deadlines have really screwed over my thinking process, although they were helpful in other aspects. I am looking forward to being able to work at my own pace again, as I feel that makes me much more successful. I have also created a more reasonable schedule for next semester, so time management should not be an issue. Without music or engineering (Oh yeah I changed my major to Business because this course showed me that I really wouldn't like what I was going into) I will have a lot more free time. I plan on getting a job and finishing my class work early in the week since I won't have any classes on Friday's, and I'm done before 2 most other days. I find myself to be much more motivated when I can work on my own time schedule, especially being able to finish things ahead of schedule. This is very helpful in the field I have chosen to major in: accounting. As one who has spent years watching my mother in this occupation, I know that having strong organizational skills and being able to get work done ahead of schedule is something that employers love.

Reflection on Project 3

Project 3 is now over! In the post below I have answered the nine questions as found on page 520 of Writing Public Lives as a reflection on this project.

Nilsson, Susanne. "When the water falls". May 17, 2014 via flickr.
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

1. What was specifically revised from one draft to another?

• I switched my article from first person to third person to help with clarity. Along with that, I removed the elements of my draft that made it appear to be a con position argument and refocused it to be a refutation argument.

2. Point to global changes: how did you reconsider your thesis or organization?

• Rather than stating my opinion later in the article, like I did in my original draft, I moved it to my introductory paragraph. I also removed some of the information on global warming and focused more on geoengineering itself.

3. What led you to these changes? A reconsideration of audience? A shift in purpose?

• As it was pointed out to me, having my own opinion on the matter so late in the article made it so the purpose of it was unclear. My audience was unsure of what I was trying to discuss or why it mattered. By moving my opinion to the first paragraph my audience would know what to expect from the get-go. 

4. How do these changes affect your credibility as an author? 

• By changing my article to be in third person I have established more credibility to myself as an author. As pointed out by Chloe, scientific articles seem to be much more effective when they're written in third person, as they make you appear to be more knowledgeable.

5. How will these changes better address the audience or venue?

• Removing the personal pronouns and relaying everything in third person will lead to less confusion. Keeping in personal pronouns can cause the audience to become lost in a sea of confusing emotions and the purpose is lost. Also, removing the unnecessary information, such as the causes of global warming, will keep my audience engaged as they will have a clear understanding of what I am trying to discuss.

6. Point to local changes: how did you reconsider sentence structure and style?

• In my original draft I focused more on my opinions and what I thought. In my final draft I decided to remove the element of writing in first person and incorporated more action verbs into my project.

7. How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?

• By incorporating more action verbs they will be able to see that geoengineering is an active issue that is having an impact on their lives. It is not an issue that is standing still and waiting in the distance. It is fully present and in their lives, making them more aware.

8. Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?

• The conventions of the genre were simple and didn't need much work. The only thing that could have used some revision was the point of view I chose to write in, although any form would have been acceptable.

9. Finally, how does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?

• Once again I still have that tendency to ramble or go off on tangents. I try my hardest to work on this, but I just can't seem to break this habit. The points that I bring into my writings are usually strong, I need to work on incorporating them in a way that allows for a smooth flow. Perhaps I need to take breaks more frequently and reread what I've written to make sure that I've stayed on track.

Publishing Public Argument

The time has come to publish Project 3. In the post below I have analyzed where I believe my project falls and have provided a link to my project.

wstera2. "Thousands Protest Global Warming". February 5, 2009 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

1. Mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience currently stands on the issue (before reading/watching/hearing your argument) below:

←-------------------------------------x---------------|--------------------------------------------------------->

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree                                                                                                                          disagree

2. Now mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience should be (after they've read/watched/heard your argument) below:

←----------x------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------->

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree                                                                                                                          disagree

3. Check one (and only one) of the argument types below for your public argument:

         _______ My public argument establishes an original pro position on an issue of debate.

         _______ My public argument establishes an original con position on an issue of debate.

         _______ My public argument clarifies the causes for a problem that is being debated.

         _______ My public argument proposes a solution for a problem that is being debated.

         _______ My public argument positively evaluate a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm supporting).

        ___x___ My public argument openly refutes a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm refuting).

4. Briefly explain how your public argument doesn’t simply restate information from other sources, but provides original context and insight into the situation:

• Many of the other public arguments do not address the impact geoengineering will have on society and the environment around us. In my argument I attempt to show my audience how geoengineering will have a direct impact on their lives and why they should be concerned.

5. Identify the specific rhetorical appeals you believe you've employedi n your public argument below:

Ethical or credibility-establishing appeals

                    _____ Telling personal stories that establish a credible point-of-view

                    _____ Referring to credible sources (established journalism, credentialed experts, etc.)

                         x    Employing carefully chosen key words or phrases that demonstrate you are credible (proper terminology, strong but clear vocabulary, etc.)

                    _____ Adopting a tone that is inviting and trustworthy rather than distancing or alienating

                        x    Arranging visual elements properly (not employing watermarked images, cropping images carefully, avoiding sloppy presentation)

                    _____ Establishing your own public image in an inviting way (using an appropriate images of yourself, if you appear on camera dressing in a warm or friendly or professional manner, appearing against a background that’s welcoming or credibility-establishing)

                    _____ Sharing any personal expertise you may possess about the subject (your identity as a student in your discipline affords you some authority here)

                    _____ Openly acknowledging counterarguments and refuting them intelligently

                    _____ Appealing openly to the values and beliefs shared by the audience (remember that the website/platform/YouTube channel your argument is designed for helps determine the kind of audience who will encounter your piece)

                    _____ Other: 

Emotional appeals

                    _____ Telling personal stories that create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Telling emotionally compelling narratives drawn from history and/or the current culture

                         x    Employing the repetition of key words or phrases that create an appropriate emotional impact

                         x    Employing an appropriate level of formality for the subject matter (through appearance, formatting, style of language, etc.)

                    _____ Appropriate use of humor for subject matter, platform/website, audience

                    _____ Use of “shocking” statistics in order to underline a specific point

                    _____ Use of imagery to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                         x    Employing an attractive color palette that sets an appropriate emotional tone (no clashing or ‘ugly’ colors, no overuse of too many variant colors, etc.)

                    _____ Use of music to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Use of sound effects to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    ____ Employing an engaging and appropriate tone of voice for the debate

                    _____ Other: 

Logical or rational appeals

                    _____ Using historical records from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

                    _____ Using statistics from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

                    _____ Using interviews from stakeholders that help affirm your stance or position

                    _____ Using expert opinions that help affirm your stance or position

                         x    Effective organization of elements, images, text, etc.

                    _____ Clear transitions between different sections of the argument (by using title cards, interstitial music, voiceover, etc.)

                    _____ Crafted sequencing of images/text/content in order to make linear arguments

                    _____ Intentional emphasis on specific images/text/content in order to strengthen argument

                    _____ Careful design of size/color relationships between objects to effectively direct the viewer’s attention/gaze (for visual arguments)

                         x    Other: Using hyperlinks to provide more context and show that information is from credible sources

6. Examples of my genre:

• Example 1
• Example 2
• Example 3

My final project can be found at this link.

Reflection on Project Draft 3

In the post below I have identified whose drafts I have peer reviewed and how I am feeling about my draft after this week.

PhotoGraham. "Riddle No. 5 - The Globe (lots of clues!)". November 6, 2006 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

For this peer review I looked over the drafts of Andrea and Hallye.

1. Who reviewed your Project 3 rough draft?

• Chloe has reviewed my Project 3 draft. 

2. What did you think and/or feel about the feedback you received? Be explicit and clear. Tell me what helped or what confused you about the feedback you got.

• I feel like all of the points made, aside from the one on adding more statistics instead of normal pictures, were great. I agree with all of the points she has made. Going from that my topic is too broad and it is unclear, down to keeping in mind the audience I want to target. Initially, I wanted to disagree with her point on writing my article in third person, as I found it much easier to present my voice in first person, but after some more thinking I believe that making this switch will establish more credibility for myself and clear up my topic. It also showed me how being so broad can switch the purpose of your argument. I thought that I was writing a refutation argument, but apparently it looks like I wrote a con argument without realizing it. I think that it'll be much more effective to write this article as a con argument because I am focusing more on the broader aspects of geoengineering and I am not refuting a specific publishing or anything. Overall, her advice was very helpful and has given me much insight into what I need to work on.

3. What aspects of Project 3 need to most work going forward [Audience, Purpose, Argumentation, or Genre]? How do you plan on addressing these areas? 

• My purpose needs the most work out of all of these areas. I feel like I have shifted away from geoengineering and delved into the more broad concept of global warming. I need to re-narrow my focus by removing excess information and centering in on the fallacies of geoengineering. My argumentation could also be more clear. I am stating why I think geoengineering should be refuted, but the mixture of global warming issues makes my argument more vague. By diverting my topic my audience becomes lost and it appears like I'm creating a con argument. After a lot of consideration I have chosen to shift my argument from a refutation to a con position as I feel like it better serves the point I am trying to make.

4. How are you feeling overall about the direction of your project after peer review and/or instructor conferences this week?

• Clarity, clarity, clarity. I definitely could use more clarity in my paragraphs. As always, I have a tendency to ramble or become side-tracked in my thoughts, which causes my audience to become confused. I believe that I have incorporated enough emotion to show my audience that geoengineering is dangerous, but I think I have also incorporated too much information on global warming, creating mixed emotions. 

Draft of Public Argument

In this post I have provided a link to my rough draft and has specified what I would like my peers to take into consideration when reviewing my project.

Mudridge, Simon. "Clock". April 25, 2013 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommercial 2.0 Generic License

My rough draft of project three can be found at this link.

The whole goal of my project is to convince my audience that geoengineering is dangerous and that it should not be implemented under any circumstances. I would greatly appreciate hearing your feedback on how the article made you feel. I want people to be inspired to take action after reading it, but I know that I have a tendency to ramble. Any general feedback will also be greatly appreciated!

Considering Visual Elements

After reading through Chapter 16 of Writing Public Lives, I have chosen a few questions from that section and answered them in the post below.

Bachmann, Matthias. "Sunrise". April 3, 2014 via flickr.
Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

What color choices best reflect the visual rhetorical tone of my project?

• The color choices that I feel best fit my project will include blues, greens, yellows, and whites. Although I am focusing more on the negative aspects of geoengineering, my project still does relate to the environment. I might change this as I go along, but I am very drawn to these colors because, to me, they symbolize the purity of the Earth.

How might I vary the fonts used in my project for emphasis, such as in the title and body of my project?

• I will be varying my fonts in a very simple manner. My title will have the largest font and any subsections will be slightly smaller. My body paragraphs will be the smallest, but will be in the easiest to read font to draw attention to it.

Is the theme or association that the image produces relevant to the theme of my argument?

• The theme of the images I have chosen all have to do with the Earth being in danger. It fits well with the theme that sulfuric aerosol injecting is dangerous, thus putting the Earth in peril.

Scan your public argument or your outline. Do your eyes move easily from section to section in the order that you intended?

• After scanning through my outline I noticed that I don't like how my supporting arguments flow. I think I can fix this problem by moving my second point down a paragraph. That way I can go from negative impacts to costs to how it doesn't address the source of the problem. This order makes more sense to me.

If you are writing a multimodal argument, do visual images help you move from point to point in the argument clearly?

• The images I have chosen will certainly aid me when I compose my project. It will be easier to tell if they help to move me from point to point once my rough draft has been composed.

Do too many visual images make your text busy or disorganized? If so, which images might you omit?

• Being so passionate about the environment, I was initially drawn to incorporating many images that reflected the degradation of the earth. I then realized that my purpose would become lost in a sea of images. Instead, I have elected to use a handful of images that I feel really captures the tone of my piece.

Do the different visual or textual elements come together persuasively as a whole, or are there elements that seem disconnected or out of place?

• The only visual element that worries me in the picture that I plan on including at the end. My intention is to close out the piece by looking ahead for a brighter future. The picture that I plan on using is one of a calm lake, but I fear that it, along with the last section of my post, may seem a bit out of place.

If you are calling your audience to take action, are the consequences of not taking action and the benefits of taking action clearly expressed?

• Looking at my outline, I have certainly addressed the consequences of not taking action. By that I mean that I have explained how it is already impacting my audience's life. I guess I could explain how it will only worsen if nothing is done to stop it.

Project 3 Outline

In the post below I have developed an outline for Project 3, primarily focusing on my body paragraphs.

Adriano, Andrea Della. "Global Warming. The Earth became the newest Waterworld". November 3, 2007 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Introduction:
For my introduction I plan on taking the approach of defining or narrowing the problem. Seeing as climate change is such a huge issue, individuals can often feel lost and like they aren't able to help. I want to show my audience that they do matter and that they can help to progress climate change mitigation.

Body:
1. Major Supporting Arguments:

• *Aerosol injecting (chemicals) has negative health impacts.
• *Aerosol injecting has a negative impact on our soil, which produces our food.
• *This method doesn't even address the root of the problem.
• *Although it may seem cheap now, it will be more expensive in the long run.
• These scientists and the government are only interested in making a profit.
• Investing in CDR will be much more beneficial.
• Utilizing such a method infringes on protecting the rights that we have as Americans.
• Although it will initially appear to be helping out, aerosol injecting is only making the problem worse.
• *They haven't even tested the method out and they believe it can help combat climate change. Where's the proof?

2. Major Rebuttal Arguments:

• *The other methods take more time to work and climate change needs to be dealt with now.
• *Climate change isn't real and there is no need to test these methods.
• *There is no need to fund climate change projects because money could be better spent elsewhere.
• Geoengineering is cheap and easy to implement.
• Geoengineering will quickly combat climate change.
• Climate change is just being used as a way for politicians to corrupt the country.

3. Key Support and Rebuttal Points:

• * will symbolize the main points I plan on addressing.

4, Tentative Topic Sentences:

Major Supports:

1. Sulfuric aerosol injecting has many negative impacts on our health and our environment.
2. This supposed brilliant method for dealing with climate change doesn't actually address the source of our problems.
3. Many scientists support geoengineering because it is easy to use now and is cheap. However, when you take into account all of the negative effects it ends up being more expensive.
4. These scientists are so eager to put aerosol injecting to wide-scale use, but they haven't even tested the method out.

Major Rebuttals:

1. Climate change is having a negative impact now and needs to be addressed before it is too late.
2. It shouldn't matter if scientists wish to test out these methods because climate change does not exist.
3. Regardless of whether or not this method will work, there are more important areas that deserve the funding.

5. Gather Evidence:

Major Supports:

1. "What in the World Are They Spraying?" documentary where they discuss soil impacts, breathing problems, and neurological damage.
2. The Ethics of Geoengineering and Tim Flannery. Both of these address how SRM methods aren't actually addressing the root of the problem and are attempting to cover it up.
3. 20 Reasons, Paul Crutzen interview and Paul Crutzen essay. These three sources, along with chart projections from my gen ed class, will be very useful for addressing the fact that not addressing the root of the problem is more expensive in the long run.
4. The Ethics of Geoengineering and David Keith MIT article. Both of these articles discuss how they haven't even tested the methods out yet. They are eager to put the methods to use, but are unsure of any possible side effects.

Major Rebuttals:

1. Paul Crutzen essay and TED Talk by David Keith. David Keith and Paul Crutzen are both heavily invested in the SRM method. The year 2050 is seen as a doomsday year for many environmental individuals and these two wish to address the problems now rather than later.
2. Global Warming Believers are a "cult". This article addresses the fact that climate change isn't a real issue. It was made up and some people are just trying to convert the innocents to their ways.
3. Exxon Funding Climate Denial and "Dark Money" Funds. Some major companies have decided to support funding those who don't believe in climate change. They want to show that scientists are just out for the money and other areas need it more.

Conclusion: 
For my conclusion I will either be outlining the positive consequences or focusing on the future of the debate. I know that I am addressing many negatives in my piece, but I don't want my audience to feel completely hopeless. I want to leave them looking forward to a brighter future and show them how they can help.


Reflection:
For this reflection I read Swati and Chloe's Project 3 Outline posts. Swati and I have both chosen topics that can leave our readers feeling overwhelmed and like that they are unable to help out. We are both aiming to show them that they can contribute, even if they aren't necessarily in the field that the issue began in. Chloe is taking a different approach than I am, but we are both informing our audience of an issue that is going on in an attempt to enlighten them.

Analyzing My Genre

In this post I have analyzed different aspects of the genre I have chosen for Project 3 and the role it will play in my public argument. All of the questions can be found on page 342 of Writing Public Lives.

James, Josh. "Tumblr". August 4, 2011 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Although I was originally considering creating a YouTube video for this project, I feel like a blog post will be much more effective for my audience. Some examples of blog posts addressing important issues or debates can be found at any of the following five links:

• Killing Bugs With Fire
• Unexpected Volcano Eruption in Chile
• Even Avogadro didn't know Avogadro's Number
• Here's the Most Important Rule for Science Writing
• Antarctica Might Be Gaining Ice, But Global Warming Ain't Over

Social Context:

Where is the genre typically set?

• The genre is typically set in online places where controversies can be easily accessed and discussed. It is more common in places where individuals are able to freely comment and express themselves.

What is the subject of the genre?

• The subject of the genre ranges anywhere from creative expression, like explaining why setting ants on fire is a bad idea, to expressing opinions on controversial issues such as Antarctica gaining ice.

Who uses the genre?

• Anyone can use this genre, but it is primarily used by younger adults, usually in their 20's.

When and why is the genre used? What purposes does the genre serve for the people who use it?

• As previously stated, this genre is often used to discuss controversial issues. They spark the most conversation after a debate is revealed. This genre allows users to express their opinions and to receive feedback freely.

Rhetorical Patterns of the Genre:

What type of content is usually included and excluded?

• In  all of the examples provided the issue or topic at hand is briefly introduced. They address the impact or topic these issues will have on their lives and why they matter. The nitty gritty details are often excluded, or if they are present they are simplified.

What rhetorical appeals are used most often? Do you notice any patterns in the appeals to logos, pathos, or ethos?

• Pathos are the most notable rhetorical appeals used in this genre. Blogs, being very opinionated, are full of emotions. They often end up evoking emotions out of their audience and are the primary way of getting the audience involved.

How are the texts organized? Do they generally open in similar ways? Conclude in similar ways? What common parts do the samples share?

• The texts are generally opened by stating the issue being discussed and the viewpoint the author has. The texts are organized based on what the author feels is the most important thing to address. They also tend to conclude by stating why the issue matters. The examples I have included all contain some form of imagery and most use hyperlinks to refer to more information.

Do sentences in the genre share a certain style? Are they mostly active, passive, simple, or complex? Is there an abundance or lack of question marks, exclamation points, or semicolons?

• Sentences in the genre are typically more active. Depending on the author, sentences go back and forth between complex and simple. For example, in the blog post about writing about science, a large portion of the sentences were simple and active. In the other examples there was a mixture between complex and simple. In this type of genre question marks are often used to appear more cynical or to ask rhetorical questions.

What type of word choice is used? Do many of the words fit in a particular category of jargon or slang? Is the overall effect of the word choice formal, informal, humorous, or academic?

• The word choice also depends on the author. Typically less jargon is used because people are just trying to express their opinions on an issue. Opinionated blog posts tend to fall on the less formal side of things, working to connect to younger audiences and to seem more relatable.

Analyze What those Patterns Reveal about the Social Context of the Genre:

Who does the genre include and who does it exclude?

• The genre includes many individuals who pride themselves in being on the internet. Although they are interested in the typical news story, they are more excited and interested to hear others opinions on the stories. This type of genre excludes many older individuals who typically receive their news from more standard news outlets like television shows or newspapers.

What roles for writers and readers does the genre encourage?

• The genre encourages writers to express their own opinions on the matter and to see how others are feeling about the same subject. It encourages readers to support the author's cause and to try and make a difference in their life.

What values and beliefs are assumed about or encouraged from users of the genre?

• This type of genre encourages users to make their beliefs on issues known. When using this genre it is assumed that users want feedback from their audience and it encourages readers to go out and make their own opinions known.

What content does the genre treat as most valuable? Least valuable?

• This genre considers content with the most likelihood to spark emotion to be the most valuable. It wants to show why the author's opinion matters and why the audience should care. Depending on the issue, content with large amounts of data and numbers are often excluded because they are likely to bore the audience. Rather than explaining all of the details they are simply hyperlinked to be used at the reader's discretion. 

Reflection:

For this reflection I read through the posts of Casey and Elliot. Casey and I are both formatting our projects after articles published on Wired, however we noticed different rhetorical appeals being used. In the subsection I was in, which was science blogs, I noticed a larger appeal to pathos, while she noticed a larger appeal to logos. It was interesting to see how the same website can have such a different approach depending on the section you were in. Elliot has chosen Slate as his model for this project. This website, much like the section I am writing in, appeals more to pathos and is much more informal. 

Considering Types

In the post below I have identified which type of argument will work best for my issue based on the descriptions given on pages 412-413 of Writing Public Lives.

After reading through the types of arguments and taking into consideration the activity we completed in class, I believe a refutational argument would best suit my issue. Since I am in heavy opposition to aerosol injection and have already confirmed that in previous posts, the only type of argument that suits my belief is a refutational one. I plan on pointing out all of the flaws and fallacies behind this method. Having a severely negative viewpoint, using a refutation argument will greatly help to deliver my point across.

Whitehouse, Phil. "Angry". June 14, 2008 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Had I been focusing on the other geoengineering methods, such as carbon dioxide removal, I would have chosen an evaluative argument. This type of argument would point out all of the reasons why carbon dioxide removal would have been great. It has a very positive type of tone, which is what I would want my audience to take away from it when reading. However, since I am focusing only on the negatives, this type of argument would not be useful for delivering my points.


Reflection:
For this reflection I read through Victoria's My Rhetorical Action Plan and Considering Types as well as Evan's My Rhetorical Action Plan and Considering Types. Both of them did a great job at taking into the consideration of the needs of their audience and have chosen good outlets to publish their work on. Although Evan did a good job at analyzing his audience, he didn't provide any examples to where he might publish his work which may make it harder for him in the long run. Victoria also did the same thing as Evan. I feel like having examples to refer back to will be really helpful in the creation process, but to each their own. Victoria's issue has many religious aspects to deal with and she has realized the potential problems they may have, which is great. I am still feeling confident in the outlets I have chosen and believe that I have done a good job at considering the needs of my audience.

My Rhetorical Action Plan

In the post below I have addressed how I plan on carrying out my issue for Project 3.

Fakhamzadeh, Babak. "Blog posting flow chart". January 7, 2009 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Audience: I am trying to persuade young adults with my public argument.

• Knowledge: The audience knows very little about this specific issue at hand, but knows that climate change is a real issue. It has been addressed numerous times in the news and has even been discussed by Pope Francis. Some of them may still believe that climate change isn't real, but I will refute that by pointing out the facts and studies completed.

• Standards of argument: Research that points out all of the negative health impacts and environmental impacts will be persuasive for my audience. They, being young, likely aren't interested in the nitty gritty details, and will just want to know the impact it will have on their lives.

• Visual Elements: Simplified bulleted lists, short and quick information. Being a technology driven generation, we want any information given to us to be short and sweet. There should be no guessing on what is trying to be said and it should be visually appealing.

• Purpose: My audience is listening to my argument to expand their understanding of an idea and to be encouraged to take action. My argument is likely to motivate my audience. It is having a negative impact on their day-to-day life and will encourage them to take a stand.

Genre: Video format or a blog post

• The function of a video format is to relay information in a quick and visual manner. Since my audience is primarily younger individuals, they will not have the patience to read through long walls of text. Videos are short and easy to rewatch to retain information.

• The setting of my genre is seen a lot on social media sites. I could see it being used on websites such as Youtube or maybe even CNN. Many articles on CNN have videos attached and is a good outlet for releasing important information.

• Since videos with a lot of information can be monotonous, I will be focusing heavily on pathos. It is much easier to connect to an audience emotionally in a video and it will keep them invested.

• I will implement the use of slides and music. These further help to appeal to the audience's emotions.

• I will be utilizing an informal/conversational style for this genre. I want to be relatable to my audience and be open to their viewpoints on this issue.

ex: YouTube, CNN

• The function of a blog post is to express how one feels about an issue and to get their voice out there. I chose it because I am very opinionated about my issue and a blog post would be a great way to express my thoughts.

• The setting of my genre is seen a lot on news websites or in google searches. I could see it being used on sites such as Tumblr or WordPress.

• Blogs can use hyperlinks and would include a lot of pathos and ethos. The hyperlinks would help to establish my credibility, and since blogs are opinionated I am connecting to my audience on an emotional level.

• I will be utilizing images and possibly short videos if they suit my cause.

• Much like with the other genre this will be semi-informal and conversational.

ex: WordPress, Tumblr

Positive Reactions:

• The public fights to stop geoengineering.
• The audience is encouraged to take more actions to combat climate change.
• The audience will be angry enough to inform others of this issue.

Negative Rebuttals:

• Geoengineering is cheap and easy, why not use it? I will rebuttal by pointing out how other methods are cheaper and better over time.
• Geoengineering will quickly combat climate change. I will rebuttal by pointing out that it is not addressing the root of the issue and will worsen it.
• Climate change is not a "real" issue and was just made up by the government. I will rebuttal by addressing the difference between global warming and the greenhouse effect and provide studies.

Analyzing Purpose

In the post below I have thought about what I plan on adding to the current debate on geoengineering and how my audience might react to it.

Leeson, Evan. "unfolding". May 18, 2009 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

Goal of public argument: What do you want your readers to do, feel, think, believe, etc. as a result of reading it?

• After watching the video I create, I want my viewers to feel motivated to take a stand against geoengineering. Current publishings on the issue do a poor job at connecting to the public. My goal is to make the information presented more relatable to all viewers. By the end of it they should be angered by the fact that this is the way some scientists are trying to "help" combat climate change. These methods do not address the root of the problem and only tries to cover it up.

Plausible Actions/Reactions:

• The audience begins to take a stand against geoengineering
• The audience is more motivated to help combat climate change
• The audience researches more on their own
• The audience is angered by the issue

Not Plausible:

• Geoengineering is abolished due to public outrage
• Scientists reconsider utilizing aerosol injecting
• Everyone goes against geoengineering

Cause/Effect Tracing:

• Cause: Audience researches more individually
• Effect: Searches for better ways to deal with climate change
• Effect: Create rallies/groups that are against geoengineering
• Effect: Develop a better way to deal with climate change

Advancing My Cause:

• The groups of people who are heavily involved in climate activism are the most likely to advance my cause. These people are actively looking for publishings on how to deal with climate change in a positive manner. By studying my issue and why it should be stopped, they are the ones that will take action. They are the ones who will go out and protest geoengineering. They, with the established voices in the public, will inform others of the problems behind geoengineering.

Analyzing Context

In preparation for Project 3, I have identified different perspectives of my of my issue and have answered the questions on page 340 of Writing Public Lives.

Haar, Kate Ter. "Examining Clouds".  April 12, 2012 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

1. What are the key perspectives or schools of thought on the debate that you are studying?

• Geoengineering, specifically sulfuric aerosol injecting (SAI), will greatly help to combat anthropogenic climate change.
• Geoengineering, specifically sulfuric aerosol injecting, will do nothing but worsen the already negative impacts anthropogenic climate change has had.

2. What are the major points of contention or major disagreements among these perspectives?

• Geoengineering (SAI) is the cheapest and quickest way to combat climate change. Even though it may be cheap and quick, the potential risks aren't worth it and time would be better spent investing time and money into other geoengineering methods.

3. What are possible points of agreement, or the possible common ground between these perspectives?

• Climate change has definitely reached a turning point. If it isn't properly addressed soon, by the year 2050 the world will have reached a catastrophic point that it is no longer able to recover from.

4. What are the ideological differences, if any, between the perspectives?

• Both groups have the same ideological beliefs. The only difference is how they wish to combat climate change. Those who support aerosol injecting don't actually wish to address the source of the problem.

5. What specific actions do their perspectives or texts ask them to take?

• Pro-SAI: Support the concept of aerosol injecting. Totally ignore the central cause of the problems and provide us with funding.
• Anti-SAI: Take a stand against those who support aerosol injecting. These methods do not address the root of the problem and only attempt to cover it up.

6. What perspectives are useful in supporting your own arguments about this issue? Why did you choose these?

• Anti-SAI individuals. After all of the research I have completed and all of the beliefs I previously had, I most agree with those that are against geoengineering. Much like them, I believe climate change should be dealt with in a more natural manner, aiming to remove carbon from the atmosphere. Aerosol injecting does not follow this belief and therefore I am against it.

7. What perspectives do you think will be the greatest threat to your argument? Why so?

• There are no significant threats, but if I had to choose one I guess it would be those who support aerosol injecting. Climate change is a very pressing issue that needs to be addressed soon. SAI would help the issue quickly, but it also has many risks. SAI is also the cheapest method out of any of the currently proposed methods.

Reflection:

For this reflection I read through the posts of Andrea and Sam. Once again Andrea and I have chosen to focus on the same issue. All of our responses were essentially the same even though we have slightly different viewpoints. I feel like I will be able to support my viewpoint more strongly because I have chosen one side of the debate to focus on. Sam also appears to have a very strong opinion on the issue at hand. Having an established opinion will certainly make it easier to contribute to the debate.

Audience and Genre

In the post below I have identified two target audiences for my project and where they might read any publications that I make.

Davies, Brett. "The chosen one". May 8, 2015 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

Audience 1

One audience that might be interested in my topic is individuals who are invested in combating climate change. Many of these people will likely be young adults yearning to make a difference in the world. They will be interested in my research because not only am I addressing how global warming has affected places around the world, but I am also addressing how we could combat it. This audience is likely exasperated by how the government is dealing with these pressing issues and want to make a change.

Publication locations and genres:
This audience will be drawn into sources that are online and that utilize catchy titles and visual aids. Many young adults receive most of their news from sources that contain titles that appear to be interesting (also known as click bait). Although I don't condone this type of advertisement, it has certainly proven to be effective. This audience also enjoys descriptive titles that essentially deliver the point right away so they don't have to pay attention when they read.

Examples: Slate
New York Times

They also prefer websites that include audio clips and short videos. In a technology driven era, young adults want everything handed to them on a silver platter. They want any important information to be brief and to be to the point. This is where visual media comes into play.
Examples: Youtube
CNN

Audience 2

Another audience that may be interested in my topic is individuals who want to follow Pope Francis's words. Many people find Pope Francis to be an inspirational individual. His views on many forefront issues are radically different from his predecessors. He is especially inspirational to young adults around the world. They want to help Pope Francis achieve his visions as he has positively impacted their lives.

Publication locations and genres:
Print genres and multimodal texts are very effective for this type of audience. Many people that heed to Pope Francis's words are often religious and consume their news from conservative media outlets. These outlets often utilize both text and images to deliver their points.

Examples: Drudge Report
Fox News

There are also the young adults that are interested in what Pope Francis has to say .They will receive most of their information from pieces of text mixed in with clips or videos. They want to have the information available in audio form, but also want to be able to read more in depth about it if they wish to do so.

Examples: The Huffington Post
PolicyMic

Extended Annotated Bibliography

Looking forward to the next project and back on the questions from the previous blog post, I have created an annotated bibliography.

My annotated bibliography was created in Google Docs and can be found at this link.

Stevens, Mark. "The Road Ahead (Zion National Park)". November 28, 2013 via flickr.
Attribution-NonCommerical-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic License

Narrowing My Focus

In the post below I have selected a handful of questions from the previous post and have explained why I think they are important or interesting.

viZZual.com. "On Target". July 10, 2008 via flickr.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

Was the U.S. the first country to address geoengineering as a proposed solution for climate change?

• The documentary I watched implied that other countries were aware of chemtrails and aerosol injecting, so where did the idea originate from? How has it impacted how individuals perceive geoengineering? Depending on where it first came from, people may choose to perceive geoengineering negatively.

How significant of an effect has global warming had on more developed countries around the world?

• This is a fundamental question that deserves an answer. How have countries like China and India dealt with a significant increase in greenhouse gases? Are the proposed geoengineering methods only for more developed countries or for everyone? If geoengineering is meant to appeal to a larger array of people, the way it is addressed in the media will likely differ from how it would be if it were only for the U.S..

Has Pope Francis's recent speeches on climate change altered how the public is addressing climate change?

• Geoengineering is still a concept widely unknown to the general public. In light of Pope Francis's visits and speeches on climate change, it appears that the public was left fuming at his words. Maybe now they have become more aware of the proposed methods for combating climate change and how it will affect them.