Sunday, December 6, 2009
Saturday, December 5, 2009
This Is It.
It's hard to believe this is my last blog post.
Thankfully, they went a lot better than I expected.
I wonder if I'm going to miss this??
One aspect of this class that I have particularly enjoyed has been noting its relevence to my life and connecting the material to areas outside the English classroom. On more than one occasion I was able to think about topics I was learning about in my Sociology class in terms of the information I was learning in this English class, and vice versa. Both classes, for example, discussed how the media and technology affect our society, particularly our education system. In this class, we noted how the internet has in some ways made us dumber, and learned from Chris Hedges the dangers of illiteracy. In my Sociology class however, I learned about a study concerning cell phone technology and its effects on literacy. Surprisingly, the study found that those who use "text language" actually do better in English classes. Apparently being able to make abbreviations and phonetically shorten words proves a deep understanding of the English language. So, from both courses, I was able to learn about both the good and bad effects of technology.
I have also found that this class has subtley changed the way I read and write on the internet. Before, I would never go to the web to seek out news. Actually, I wouldn't really go much of anywhere to seek out the news. Now however, I am a regular reader of the New York Times and The Daily Dish and I like it. It feels good to have some useful knowledge and to be up to date on some local, national, and even global issues. Reading online, like writing online, is not as difficult as I thought it would be.
Finally, as corny as it sounds, I think I have gained a new appreciation for writing and reading. I have learned that not everyone values these things anymore. There are many people who no longer even take the time to fully digest a text or even attempt to put their thoughts into written words. Knowing these things makes me treasure my own simple abilities to read and write and encourages me to work harder to preserve them.
Thankfully, they went a lot better than I expected.
I wonder if I'm going to miss this??
One aspect of this class that I have particularly enjoyed has been noting its relevence to my life and connecting the material to areas outside the English classroom. On more than one occasion I was able to think about topics I was learning about in my Sociology class in terms of the information I was learning in this English class, and vice versa. Both classes, for example, discussed how the media and technology affect our society, particularly our education system. In this class, we noted how the internet has in some ways made us dumber, and learned from Chris Hedges the dangers of illiteracy. In my Sociology class however, I learned about a study concerning cell phone technology and its effects on literacy. Surprisingly, the study found that those who use "text language" actually do better in English classes. Apparently being able to make abbreviations and phonetically shorten words proves a deep understanding of the English language. So, from both courses, I was able to learn about both the good and bad effects of technology.
I have also found that this class has subtley changed the way I read and write on the internet. Before, I would never go to the web to seek out news. Actually, I wouldn't really go much of anywhere to seek out the news. Now however, I am a regular reader of the New York Times and The Daily Dish and I like it. It feels good to have some useful knowledge and to be up to date on some local, national, and even global issues. Reading online, like writing online, is not as difficult as I thought it would be.
Finally, as corny as it sounds, I think I have gained a new appreciation for writing and reading. I have learned that not everyone values these things anymore. There are many people who no longer even take the time to fully digest a text or even attempt to put their thoughts into written words. Knowing these things makes me treasure my own simple abilities to read and write and encourages me to work harder to preserve them.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Final Essay Draft
Here's my essay.
I've worked long and hard on this sucker.
And now here I am wondering if I've even followed the prompt...help.
I've worked long and hard on this sucker.
And now here I am wondering if I've even followed the prompt...help.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Taking an Approach
From my understanding, "taking an approach," as descirbed by Harris, is a technique in which the writer channels another mode of thinking, or perhaps even another style of writing altogether, to express his ideas. It is similar to both forwarding and countering in that it involves acknowledging the validity of a previously established idea, and then expanding on that idea. It is different in that it does not so much use this idea to support the current argument, but to offer insight into the argumentative processes of the writer. The act of "taking an approach" makes most sense to me when compared or thought of as an introduction or premise to a piece of writing. During an introduction or prologue, the author can explain the inspirations for his written text - perhaps a particular idea of another intellectual, or the stylistic aspects of another piece of writing - which descirbe the approach he will take in his writing.
I know that definition is a little bit hairy, but it's even more difficult (in my opinion) to find examples of a writer taking an approach (at least online). It seems the author almost has to blatantly say, for example: "I'm writing this piece from a Freudian point of view, but updating some of his theories to coincide with today's culture" to know for sure that he is taking an approach. Otherwise, how can a reader know for sure what has inspired the writer's thinking? With that being said, I was able to understand Andrew Sullivan's basic approach by reading about his background. I know that he writes from the perspective of a self-proclaimed "libertarian conservative," gay, Catholic, British man. Obviously, all of these traits affect his views and therefore how and what he writes about on his blog.
I know that definition is a little bit hairy, but it's even more difficult (in my opinion) to find examples of a writer taking an approach (at least online). It seems the author almost has to blatantly say, for example: "I'm writing this piece from a Freudian point of view, but updating some of his theories to coincide with today's culture" to know for sure that he is taking an approach. Otherwise, how can a reader know for sure what has inspired the writer's thinking? With that being said, I was able to understand Andrew Sullivan's basic approach by reading about his background. I know that he writes from the perspective of a self-proclaimed "libertarian conservative," gay, Catholic, British man. Obviously, all of these traits affect his views and therefore how and what he writes about on his blog.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Contradicting Myself
At the end of a previous post of mine, Harris vs. Sullivan, I wrote:
After re-reading that, I'm wondering just what I was thinking. Who did I think I was to make such a sweeping statement about writing and what it means to write? This is a concept I am still struggling with, even though it appears as if I were once an expert on the subject. I admit, a "true" piece of writing is all of the things I mentioned before. It is analytical, it is personal, and it is honest. But that is not all; writing is much more than that. While it is analytical, it is also consensual, it is personal, but still relatable, and it is honest and yet ambiguous. Furthermore, writing is more than just a list of adjectives. It is a style and a process all its own that is deeply dependent upon the individual actually doing the writing. The writer sifts through his thoughts and decides which ones are meaningful enough to be written down - which ones reflect what he's really thinking. The writer, therefore, decides what is true and untrue, what should be written and what should not. In this way, it seems that all writing is a true form of writing.
Okay. Obviously I just countered my previous idea that blogging is writing in its truest form. I did this by first acknowledging the valid traits of writing that I mentioned before - how it's analytical, personal, and honest. I then expanded on these ideas by saying that their opposites could also be used to describe writing - it is consensual, relatable, and ambiguous. I then took the piece in a new direction and offered a different explanation of "true" writing. This time I suggested that perhaps all writing is true writing, as opposed to blogging being the ultimate "true" writing.
P.S. I'm not sure why my block quote looks like a poem. I couldn't get it to all be aligned.
In many ways, bloggers are the kind of expert academic readers that Harris
describes. They analyze texts, turn them into something personal, and get at the
core of their message. While I think both Harris and Sullivan would agree that
blogging is a form of writing, I am willing to propose that blogging is perhaps
writing in its truest form.
After re-reading that, I'm wondering just what I was thinking. Who did I think I was to make such a sweeping statement about writing and what it means to write? This is a concept I am still struggling with, even though it appears as if I were once an expert on the subject. I admit, a "true" piece of writing is all of the things I mentioned before. It is analytical, it is personal, and it is honest. But that is not all; writing is much more than that. While it is analytical, it is also consensual, it is personal, but still relatable, and it is honest and yet ambiguous. Furthermore, writing is more than just a list of adjectives. It is a style and a process all its own that is deeply dependent upon the individual actually doing the writing. The writer sifts through his thoughts and decides which ones are meaningful enough to be written down - which ones reflect what he's really thinking. The writer, therefore, decides what is true and untrue, what should be written and what should not. In this way, it seems that all writing is a true form of writing.
Okay. Obviously I just countered my previous idea that blogging is writing in its truest form. I did this by first acknowledging the valid traits of writing that I mentioned before - how it's analytical, personal, and honest. I then expanded on these ideas by saying that their opposites could also be used to describe writing - it is consensual, relatable, and ambiguous. I then took the piece in a new direction and offered a different explanation of "true" writing. This time I suggested that perhaps all writing is true writing, as opposed to blogging being the ultimate "true" writing.
P.S. I'm not sure why my block quote looks like a poem. I couldn't get it to all be aligned.
Saturday, November 7, 2009
On the Contrary
In simple terms, Harris uses the tactic of countering "not to nullify but to suggest a different way of thinking." Once again, the act of keeping a story, opinion, theory, or idea alive is the goal of countering, just as we have seen it to be the goal of forwarding, as well as blogging (in general). It is different from forwarding though in that you note the limits of an idea or a text and suggest a new, perhaps substituted, way to think about it. When forwarding, as we learned, you note the uses of an idea or a text and apply that information directly to your own, similar, yet slightly more developed, line of thinking. Harris outlines three ways to counter a text, which are: arguing the other side, uncovering values, and dissenting. No matter which of these approaches to countering is utilized, it is easy to offend to the opposing party, which Harris warns against. To avoid unnecessary fights and personal hurt, Harris proposes and encourages "honest yet civil disagreement," in which the purpose of countering is reiterated as a force to "rewrite the work of others in order to say something more," rather than settling on simply disagreeing.
I found an example of countering in Andrew Sullivan's blog, The Daily Dish, in which one of his readers wrote in response to John Nagl's prescription for Afghanistan. John Nagl is a retired United States Army officer who is seen as an expert on counterinsurgency and recently (I'm assuming) released his opinions of how the situation in Afghanistan should be handled. The reader counters Nagl's ideas by first stating two of the claims he believes are true and valid. Thus, fulfilling the first step of countering and offering credit to Nagl. The reader then states a third claim made by Nagl which he (the reader) believes is unrealistic and should not be applied to our relations with Afghanistan - a move that marks the second step of countering. Finally, and most importantly, the reader proposes a new use for Nagl's third claim. He argues against Nagl's idea, but does not stop at disagreement. Rather, he offers a new approach to this idea, keeping it alive, but sending it in a new direction.
I found an example of countering in Andrew Sullivan's blog, The Daily Dish, in which one of his readers wrote in response to John Nagl's prescription for Afghanistan. John Nagl is a retired United States Army officer who is seen as an expert on counterinsurgency and recently (I'm assuming) released his opinions of how the situation in Afghanistan should be handled. The reader counters Nagl's ideas by first stating two of the claims he believes are true and valid. Thus, fulfilling the first step of countering and offering credit to Nagl. The reader then states a third claim made by Nagl which he (the reader) believes is unrealistic and should not be applied to our relations with Afghanistan - a move that marks the second step of countering. Finally, and most importantly, the reader proposes a new use for Nagl's third claim. He argues against Nagl's idea, but does not stop at disagreement. Rather, he offers a new approach to this idea, keeping it alive, but sending it in a new direction.
Monday, November 2, 2009
Forwarding
Joseph Harris outlines the idea of "forwarding" in chapter three of his text "Rewriting: How to do Things with Texts." Basically, the main purpose of forwarding is to present outside sources of information - or other texts, ideas, terms, keywords, and/or images - and then re-present them by adding your own take on the issue at hand. Harris writes that "in forwarding a text, you extend its uses." You don't simply cite it and move on. No, forwarding is all about giving new life to an existing theory, text, or idea. It is about taking what is known, or already understood, and thinking about it differently. It is about personally evolving an idea.
Although we may not always recognize our own use of forwarding, it is something we do quite frequently. Any discussion had with classmates, with a family member, or even with a friend, is most likely an example of forwarding. Think about it, for any class discussion, the teacher presents an idea and asks the class to expand on it, or to offer their opinions. In English class, for example, I and my classmates forward ideas all the time. During every class we are presented with quotes from the blogs we have written and then expand on the more interesting ones. We also discuss the readings we are assigned, such as blogs and other articles. In both instances, we add our own ideas to what we have read, keeping the topics alive and in motion.
When relating the technique of forwarding to that of a conversation or discussion, blogs become an obvious source to find such techniques. In essence, a blog is after all, a continuous online discussion. Andrew Sullivan's blog, the Daily Dish, is especially successful at forwarding ideas. A large chunk of The Daily Dish is made up of writings from people responding to previously presented issues. When these people make a new post, they take the previous information and offer their own insight and/or opinion. Foster Kamer, for example, wrote a piece called "The Truth Just Sounds Different," in which he presents a series of quotes from Levi Johnston (concerning the recent scandal between him and Sarah Palin) and offers his take on their purpose, or what he sees them to mean. Kamer suggests that perhaps Johnston is "lying about all this (the claims that Palin pushed to adopt the child Johnston had with her daughter, and that Johston has further secrets about Palin which he won't release because he doesn't want to hurt her). He has a motive: to get access to his son, and to make lots of money." The act of Kamer taking these statements from Johnston and then evaluating them, is the very technique of forwarding.
Although we may not always recognize our own use of forwarding, it is something we do quite frequently. Any discussion had with classmates, with a family member, or even with a friend, is most likely an example of forwarding. Think about it, for any class discussion, the teacher presents an idea and asks the class to expand on it, or to offer their opinions. In English class, for example, I and my classmates forward ideas all the time. During every class we are presented with quotes from the blogs we have written and then expand on the more interesting ones. We also discuss the readings we are assigned, such as blogs and other articles. In both instances, we add our own ideas to what we have read, keeping the topics alive and in motion.
When relating the technique of forwarding to that of a conversation or discussion, blogs become an obvious source to find such techniques. In essence, a blog is after all, a continuous online discussion. Andrew Sullivan's blog, the Daily Dish, is especially successful at forwarding ideas. A large chunk of The Daily Dish is made up of writings from people responding to previously presented issues. When these people make a new post, they take the previous information and offer their own insight and/or opinion. Foster Kamer, for example, wrote a piece called "The Truth Just Sounds Different," in which he presents a series of quotes from Levi Johnston (concerning the recent scandal between him and Sarah Palin) and offers his take on their purpose, or what he sees them to mean. Kamer suggests that perhaps Johnston is "lying about all this (the claims that Palin pushed to adopt the child Johnston had with her daughter, and that Johston has further secrets about Palin which he won't release because he doesn't want to hurt her). He has a motive: to get access to his son, and to make lots of money." The act of Kamer taking these statements from Johnston and then evaluating them, is the very technique of forwarding.
Friday, October 30, 2009
Blogs Get with the Times
The New York Times is undoubtedly one of the best - if not the best - news publications made available to us today. For many other sources distributing the news, it is a force to be reckoned with, to say the least. One of the things that makes the New York Times so successful is that its staff has managed to capture the writing trends of today, while still producing news that confirms and appeals to a more antiquated and traditional style. This has especially been made possible through their use of two mediums - an online news hub and a printed newspaper. Obviously, the online site is the more popular, or societally-smart, medium. It is updated continuously and has articles written with a quick, easy-to-understand, and easy-to-read tone. All of these traits, which harness immediacy and efficiency, appeal to the masses. On the other hand, its news stories focus more on facts and less on opinions and are also published in a newspaper. These are, of course, traits that make the NYT seem more refined and acceptable by the more traditional sense of news reporting.
I, personally, have been reading the online publication of the New York Times, as well as a couple of other blogs to receive my news. While the NYT and blogs are fundamentally different, I think many similarities can be drawn between the two. For example, The Daily Dish - one of the blogs I am following - which is written by Andrew Sullivan, covers much of the same news that the NYT covers - like the healthcare debate, for example. While of course his blog presents the news with a slight bias and demands reader involvement, it achieves the same tasks of the NYT. Both sources of news are just that - sources of news. They have something to say or some information to share and so, they say it. Both the NYT and The Daily Dish are educating me and keeping me informed. The only real difference is that when I read The Daily Dish, I not only get to read news presented by Andrew Sullivan, but also the opinions of a variety of people who write in about the issues. When I read the NYT, I read one article and move on to the next. There is no audience participation or sharing of ideas like there is in a blog.
I think the New York Times does a phenomenal job of actually doing its job and providing good and sound news. This is hard to come by today and deserves much credit. I think that blogs, too, also deserve credit, for they do the job of a newspaper, and then do some more.
I, personally, have been reading the online publication of the New York Times, as well as a couple of other blogs to receive my news. While the NYT and blogs are fundamentally different, I think many similarities can be drawn between the two. For example, The Daily Dish - one of the blogs I am following - which is written by Andrew Sullivan, covers much of the same news that the NYT covers - like the healthcare debate, for example. While of course his blog presents the news with a slight bias and demands reader involvement, it achieves the same tasks of the NYT. Both sources of news are just that - sources of news. They have something to say or some information to share and so, they say it. Both the NYT and The Daily Dish are educating me and keeping me informed. The only real difference is that when I read The Daily Dish, I not only get to read news presented by Andrew Sullivan, but also the opinions of a variety of people who write in about the issues. When I read the NYT, I read one article and move on to the next. There is no audience participation or sharing of ideas like there is in a blog.
I think the New York Times does a phenomenal job of actually doing its job and providing good and sound news. This is hard to come by today and deserves much credit. I think that blogs, too, also deserve credit, for they do the job of a newspaper, and then do some more.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Teaming Up: Jarvis and Sullivan
One idea found among Jarvis's text and diagrams about the spread of news is that in times passed, the process (of gathering news) lead to the product (the packaged story). Nowadays however, Jarvis says that the process is the product. In other words, news today can no longer be packaged, distributed, and then ingested - at least not just once. After we find the news, or perhaps after it finds us, we don't just forget about it and move on; we continue to circulate the story. We talk about it with our peers, family, and friends, we search for background information, and we read about it from various sources, among other things. All the while, more and more facts and pieces of information are added to the story, making it fuller - or more substantial. Picture making a snowball: as you push your tiny lump of snow across the yard, it will get bigger, denser, and more compact until of course, you stop pushing it. A news story works the same way.
This idea of news being continuous and being found within the actual process of forming/finding news is exactly the idea Sullivan wrote about in his article, "Why I Blog." It is also, coincidentally, a large reason why blogs have become so popular. Blogging, which seems to be Sullivan's forte, is possibly the best example of Jarvis's new press-sphere. A blog contains and allows for the interaction between peers, other sources, government, and the media via online discussion and the incorporation of links. Sullivan directly addresses the continuity of news within a blog by acknowledging that "if it stops moving, it dies." I think it's safe to say that Sullivan and Hedges are arguing the same ideas.
For the most part, I'd say that I agree with the idea of news being in continuous circulation and therefore always growing and changing. This is (or seems) true for big pieces of news, but I will have to argue that it is not so true for the smaller or more trivial pieces of news. For example, I recently read an article from The New York Times website about how humans are built to run. It pointed out many of the anatomical characteristics that make humans, in general, successful runners. While I found this article to be rather interesting, I still haven't heard anyone else talking about it, heard about it on the news, or read any similar articles anywhere else. So, in this case, I ingested the news and its' process ended. Other, much larger stories though, such as the war in Iraq, have been ingested time and time again because everyone has heard and is talking about it, hearing about it, or reading about it.
This idea of news being continuous and being found within the actual process of forming/finding news is exactly the idea Sullivan wrote about in his article, "Why I Blog." It is also, coincidentally, a large reason why blogs have become so popular. Blogging, which seems to be Sullivan's forte, is possibly the best example of Jarvis's new press-sphere. A blog contains and allows for the interaction between peers, other sources, government, and the media via online discussion and the incorporation of links. Sullivan directly addresses the continuity of news within a blog by acknowledging that "if it stops moving, it dies." I think it's safe to say that Sullivan and Hedges are arguing the same ideas.
For the most part, I'd say that I agree with the idea of news being in continuous circulation and therefore always growing and changing. This is (or seems) true for big pieces of news, but I will have to argue that it is not so true for the smaller or more trivial pieces of news. For example, I recently read an article from The New York Times website about how humans are built to run. It pointed out many of the anatomical characteristics that make humans, in general, successful runners. While I found this article to be rather interesting, I still haven't heard anyone else talking about it, heard about it on the news, or read any similar articles anywhere else. So, in this case, I ingested the news and its' process ended. Other, much larger stories though, such as the war in Iraq, have been ingested time and time again because everyone has heard and is talking about it, hearing about it, or reading about it.
Monday, October 26, 2009
The Press-Sphere
What does blogger Jeff Jarvis mean when he writes that the press is becoming the press-sphere? Well, to be honest, I'm not exactly sure. After swimming through his sentences and diagrams, I have gathered, more or less, that he believes the press is losing its handle on the control of the news. It is being replaced by, or perhaps, placed at competition with, all of today's numerous news sources. Some of these news sources are the media, the government, large companies, our peers, links to background or various information, work, and search. (I'm assuming he means search engines, but your guess is as good as mine.) As you can see, the press is now only a small piece of the news-circulating puzzle. At the end of his blog, Jarvis sums up the shift in the news world by saying that news today is "bigger. . . It’s more complex. It moves over time. It’s more about process than product. It has no limit of sources and handlers and distributors and curators and perspectives." It seems to me that Jarvis is okay with this adapted style of news. After all, it is exciting (and more fair to the public) to have so many sources of information.
The only downfall I see in this is that news can now almost never be received without also receiving a complementary opinion. The news, it seems, is almost always biased. Whether written, spoken, or visually presented, we can pick up the attached undertone of a piece of news. We can know by some one's use of language, their facial expressions, the tone of their voice, etc just what they think about the subject they're relaying to us. So, to me, the new press-sphere Jarvis describes makes it difficult for anyone to think for themselves or form their own, immediate opinions. On the other hand though, the new press-sphere's wide variety of sources ensures, as I mentioned before, that we will receive more than just one opinion of the news. So, while we may initially be thinking in the terms of another and borrowing the ideas of our peers, I think in the end we will have formed a more educated opinion and be sure of our own, final stance. (I really just talked myself in circles there. Sorry about that. Hopefully it made some sense.)
One minor note I'd like to make in regards to Jarvis' post is that I think it would have been helpful for the reader if he had defined what the 'press' was, or who it comprised. That would have helped me, at least. That's all I have to say about that.
The only downfall I see in this is that news can now almost never be received without also receiving a complementary opinion. The news, it seems, is almost always biased. Whether written, spoken, or visually presented, we can pick up the attached undertone of a piece of news. We can know by some one's use of language, their facial expressions, the tone of their voice, etc just what they think about the subject they're relaying to us. So, to me, the new press-sphere Jarvis describes makes it difficult for anyone to think for themselves or form their own, immediate opinions. On the other hand though, the new press-sphere's wide variety of sources ensures, as I mentioned before, that we will receive more than just one opinion of the news. So, while we may initially be thinking in the terms of another and borrowing the ideas of our peers, I think in the end we will have formed a more educated opinion and be sure of our own, final stance. (I really just talked myself in circles there. Sorry about that. Hopefully it made some sense.)
One minor note I'd like to make in regards to Jarvis' post is that I think it would have been helpful for the reader if he had defined what the 'press' was, or who it comprised. That would have helped me, at least. That's all I have to say about that.
Saturday, October 24, 2009
My Take on The Times
I have to admit, I could probably stand to spend some more time reading and researching the New York Times (as well as both of my other blogs). I read them (almost every day), but just scroll through the headlines and read whatever is interesting to me. Now that I've just re-read that last sentence, I think that's probably the whole idea of this assignment, but I feel like I could be doing more. I've read in some of my other classmates' blogs that they're finding specific categories of news within The New York Times that they're in to. I haven't poked around the site enough to do so, as I'm slightly ashamed to say, but I hope to find something to keep coming back to. It would be cool to read something religiously every day. (And of course, by 'religiously,' I don't mean reading to find Jesus or words by which to live my life. I just mean reading to fill a need. Maybe 'regularly' would have been the better word there?)
So far, some particular stories that have caught my eye have been those concerning child development issues and parenting styles. (I'm a babysitter and a psychology major, if you couldn't tell.) I read one article about how Baby Einstein products, which are an overwhelming retail item in the baby department, have (surprisingly) not actually made babies into geniuses. What's more, Walt Disney, which owns Baby Einstein is offering $15 refunds for every Baby Einstein product that is returned before March 10. There is a limit to returning only four items, but still, that's an easy $60 and you don't even need a receipt. Another particular article that I found interesting was about the future increase in the world's population and the concern of whether or not we'll be able to produce enough food to feed everyone. Some scientists are predicting we'll need to increase our food production by 50% over the next twenty years in order to feed everyone. While the details of this issue are difficult to know for sure, it is a topic that is receiving more and more attention, and rightly so I think. So, I'm in to news about kids and larger, world-scare stories? What does that say about me?
In addition to spending more time reading The New York Times in general, I could also spend more time reading political and/or economical articles covered in The New York Times. I tend to avoid the articles about healthcare, and I get annoyed with news on the Swine Flu, but those are the big issues of today, which I should probably know more about. I guess that's something I can focus on for this next week of news.
So far, some particular stories that have caught my eye have been those concerning child development issues and parenting styles. (I'm a babysitter and a psychology major, if you couldn't tell.) I read one article about how Baby Einstein products, which are an overwhelming retail item in the baby department, have (surprisingly) not actually made babies into geniuses. What's more, Walt Disney, which owns Baby Einstein is offering $15 refunds for every Baby Einstein product that is returned before March 10. There is a limit to returning only four items, but still, that's an easy $60 and you don't even need a receipt. Another particular article that I found interesting was about the future increase in the world's population and the concern of whether or not we'll be able to produce enough food to feed everyone. Some scientists are predicting we'll need to increase our food production by 50% over the next twenty years in order to feed everyone. While the details of this issue are difficult to know for sure, it is a topic that is receiving more and more attention, and rightly so I think. So, I'm in to news about kids and larger, world-scare stories? What does that say about me?
In addition to spending more time reading The New York Times in general, I could also spend more time reading political and/or economical articles covered in The New York Times. I tend to avoid the articles about healthcare, and I get annoyed with news on the Swine Flu, but those are the big issues of today, which I should probably know more about. I guess that's something I can focus on for this next week of news.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Blog Analysis
In my last post, I listed the two blogs I was planning on following - The Daily Dish and Regret the Error. Today however, I changed my mind about what I will be reading. While I will continue to follow The Daily Dish by Andrew Sullivan, I will no longer be keeping up with Regret the Error. While this blog is entertaining, it is not regularly updated and loses its' charm rather quickly. In its place, I have decided to read Consuming Louisville - a blog about restaurants, shops, events, and happenings in Louisville.
This blog is written by one woman and one woman only - Michelle Jones. Jones is a writer, photographer, and self-proclaimed web geek who LOVES Louisville. Naturally, this blog is biased. If you're someone who hates Louisville (if such a person exists) and are looking for a place to complain, this is not the blog for you. I bet you saw that coming though, right? This blog is written (presumably) for people who live in Louisville - particularly the Highlands, although other areas are covered - and are looking to connect with their city and enjoy all it has to offer. Jones offers daily updates about events around town. Recently, for example, she has provided information about a few Halloween parties, Midnights at the Baxter, cooking lessons at the Brown Hotel, and the bestowed #1 Hotel rating of 21C (it was voted the #1 hotel in the United States by Conde Nast Traveler Magazine's Readers). Everything written is inspired by the people of Louisville - what we're in to, what we're looking for - and ultimately what is applicable to us. In short, this blog manageable, easy to read and operate, and perfect for all those Louisville lovers looking for something to do. I'm pleased I found it.
This blog is written by one woman and one woman only - Michelle Jones. Jones is a writer, photographer, and self-proclaimed web geek who LOVES Louisville. Naturally, this blog is biased. If you're someone who hates Louisville (if such a person exists) and are looking for a place to complain, this is not the blog for you. I bet you saw that coming though, right? This blog is written (presumably) for people who live in Louisville - particularly the Highlands, although other areas are covered - and are looking to connect with their city and enjoy all it has to offer. Jones offers daily updates about events around town. Recently, for example, she has provided information about a few Halloween parties, Midnights at the Baxter, cooking lessons at the Brown Hotel, and the bestowed #1 Hotel rating of 21C (it was voted the #1 hotel in the United States by Conde Nast Traveler Magazine's Readers). Everything written is inspired by the people of Louisville - what we're in to, what we're looking for - and ultimately what is applicable to us. In short, this blog manageable, easy to read and operate, and perfect for all those Louisville lovers looking for something to do. I'm pleased I found it.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Blogs I'm Following
The first blog I've chosen to follow is the The Daily Dish by Andrew Sullivan because I enjoy his writing style and appreciate his ideas (at least all that I've seen so far). The second blog I'll be following is Regret the Error, which points out any mistakes made in the press. I like that this blog's purpose is to keep the press honest and accurate. It's also good for a laugh every now and again.
Passive vs. Active
Reading through my classmates' blog posts about where they get their news was both reassuring and worrisome for me. It makes me feel better about myself to know that I'm not the only one who could improve her knowledge of current events, but also slightly worried that the general concensus is more or less the mindset of: "I'm busy. If something is important, I'll hear about it eventually." Don't get me wrong, mine would probably be the first name on the list of such thinkers, but I wish that it weren't, and as I noticed, many of my classmates wish the same thing. So why do we still carry this mentality? Why don't we do something to change it? I don't have an answer, but I think it's due in part to the fact that our culture, particularly Internet access within our culture, allows it, or at least makes it easy, to think this way. We have so much access to information that it can be difficult to filter through news and separate the important from the trivial, especially when society seems to value the more trivial end of the spectrum. But, what's interesting, is that this mentality is valid. The news will eventually find us. This is almost inevitable as every corner of the earth is filled with something to look at or to learn about or to listen to. Billboards, posters, televisions, radios, passerbys, friends, family, magazine covers, newspapers, and the internet are just a few of the constant sources of background noise (or news) that we get each day. So, while partaking in a more passive style of news-gathering may not be the most responsible or commendable method, it does seem to be the most logical. And how can anyone argue against logic? Hmmm . . . this seems like a bit of a catch 22 . . .
I think it'd be interesting to learn where and how people like Sullivan, Hedges, and Carr get their news and what they think about the passive/active approaches to new-gathering. I'm almost certain Hedges would condemn our generation (myself included) for being lazy and uninformed citizens. Sullivan would probably argue for the beautiful ambiguity that stems from our freedom to search the world (re: the web) and learn about what interests us as it is happening. Carr then, - always the level-head in this trio - would most likely express sentiments similar to my classmates' and mine. That is, he'd argue the idea of convenience, but long for news that is either decisively satisfying or else underwelming, just so he'd have a clear take on the issues.
I think it'd be interesting to learn where and how people like Sullivan, Hedges, and Carr get their news and what they think about the passive/active approaches to new-gathering. I'm almost certain Hedges would condemn our generation (myself included) for being lazy and uninformed citizens. Sullivan would probably argue for the beautiful ambiguity that stems from our freedom to search the world (re: the web) and learn about what interests us as it is happening. Carr then, - always the level-head in this trio - would most likely express sentiments similar to my classmates' and mine. That is, he'd argue the idea of convenience, but long for news that is either decisively satisfying or else underwelming, just so he'd have a clear take on the issues.
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Where Do I Get My News?
"I get the news I need from the weather report."
Sorry, that Simon & Garfunkel reference was just too perfect to pass up.
In all seriousness though, the weather really is a big part of my daily news intake. I wake up every morning, tune to the “local on the 8’s” weather update, and plan my day accordingly. How else am I supposed to know whether to wear a parka or a raincoat, to go for a run in the morning or wait until the afternoon, or to pack an umbrella or sunglasses for later? I know what you’re thinking, but no, stepping outside is not an option. For one thing, I’m too sleepy to move that much in the morning, and for another, stepping outside in the morning says nothing about what the weather will be like later in the day. Especially when you live in Louisville.
As for other news - like current local, national, and global events – I get the bulk of my information from the Courier Journal, which I read (or, more accurately, skim) every morning. My strategy is to read the front page of each section (usually skipping the Sports section) and then, if any articles particularly spark my interest, find and read the entire article. This seems to work fairly well for me; although I’m sure it wouldn’t hurt to look more in depth at a wider range of articles. I also use my parents as a source of news. They are always aware of what’s going on in the world, so if I have questions about anything, I ask them and usually get the answers I’m looking for. Every now and then I’ll watch one of the local news channels, but that rarely happens.
(By the way, if anyone's interested in hearing the full Simon & Garfunkel song I mentioned, here it is. It's one of my favorites.)
Sorry, that Simon & Garfunkel reference was just too perfect to pass up.
In all seriousness though, the weather really is a big part of my daily news intake. I wake up every morning, tune to the “local on the 8’s” weather update, and plan my day accordingly. How else am I supposed to know whether to wear a parka or a raincoat, to go for a run in the morning or wait until the afternoon, or to pack an umbrella or sunglasses for later? I know what you’re thinking, but no, stepping outside is not an option. For one thing, I’m too sleepy to move that much in the morning, and for another, stepping outside in the morning says nothing about what the weather will be like later in the day. Especially when you live in Louisville.
As for other news - like current local, national, and global events – I get the bulk of my information from the Courier Journal, which I read (or, more accurately, skim) every morning. My strategy is to read the front page of each section (usually skipping the Sports section) and then, if any articles particularly spark my interest, find and read the entire article. This seems to work fairly well for me; although I’m sure it wouldn’t hurt to look more in depth at a wider range of articles. I also use my parents as a source of news. They are always aware of what’s going on in the world, so if I have questions about anything, I ask them and usually get the answers I’m looking for. Every now and then I’ll watch one of the local news channels, but that rarely happens.
(By the way, if anyone's interested in hearing the full Simon & Garfunkel song I mentioned, here it is. It's one of my favorites.)
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Continued Revising
Hello again. Here is my paper. I keep editing this link rather than making new blog posts.
Hopefully you're still reading it...
I'm still open to comments/corrections/suggestions if anyone has any.
Hopefully you're still reading it...
I'm still open to comments/corrections/suggestions if anyone has any.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Just Something to Look at...
My Sociology teacher showed us this video (or as much as she could before her computer froze, at least) today in class. I thought some of you might find it interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLlGopyXT_g
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NLlGopyXT_g
Monday, September 28, 2009
Essay Rough Draft
This is the first draft of my extended essay.
Any comments or corrections you have would be greatly appreciated! And feel free to make them directly on the document (Just make them noticeable, please.)
The areas I'd like specific help with are the conclusion (It's awful and corny. You'll see.), citation (right now I only have each author's name in the text. Should I also include the name of the article or piece of writing I'm referring to?), and most importantly, the overall feel/message of the paper. I'm concerned that I haven't actually said anything...
Thanks for your help!
Any comments or corrections you have would be greatly appreciated! And feel free to make them directly on the document (Just make them noticeable, please.)
The areas I'd like specific help with are the conclusion (It's awful and corny. You'll see.), citation (right now I only have each author's name in the text. Should I also include the name of the article or piece of writing I'm referring to?), and most importantly, the overall feel/message of the paper. I'm concerned that I haven't actually said anything...
Thanks for your help!
Friday, September 25, 2009
I found this article through the JSTOR database on UofL's website. After skimming it, it seems to have some good points about how partaking in electronic discussions can help improve critical thinking skills. It points out that an electronic discussion incorporates practice of both traditional writing and in-class discussion. So students actually seem to be getting the best of both worlds.
I hope it may be helpful to someone.
technology can help critical thinking
I hope it may be helpful to someone.
technology can help critical thinking
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
There It Was.
Well, that wasn't so bad after all. After about a half of a semester, thirteen classes, and nine blog posts, I'm finally comfortable with this whole blogging thing. It really was not nearly as bad as I thought it would be; it's actually been kind of fun. I feel like I've come to develop a stronger and more to-the-point voice through blog writing that I haven't been able to achieve before, at least not when it comes to school assignments. I'm not even that worried about the formal essay we have to write because I feel like all of these posts have served as the warm-up for that one essay. I guess what I mean, more simply, is that I feel well-practiced in writing. And I also feel less intimidated by it. Lately, the process of writing doesn't seem to be as heavy or pressing as it used to be. Sure, I still pause between sentences to contemplate what I want to say, but I've found that writing, through a blog particularly, has helped me sort through my ideas as I write them. It truly is a form of "writing out loud." (I'm almost positive I got that quote right.)
To reflect on the class and assignments as a whole, I'd say I've been pleasantly surprised with everything we've been reading, writing, and discussing. Because of the articles we read by Sullivan, Carr, Hedges, and Thompson, I feel, in a way, like I'm one step ahead of my peers when it comes to the Internet. It's hard to explain, but before I had never really considered all that the Internet does for us. I mean, immediately it provides us with whatever news, entertainment, and/or information we could ever want, but it also has more long-term, and often hidden, effects. It changes the way we think, read, write, and interact with one another, which I had never slowed down enough to realize before. I guess I'm just excited to have this new outlook. And, even more, to feel like I've got a pretty good grasp of it.
To reflect on the class and assignments as a whole, I'd say I've been pleasantly surprised with everything we've been reading, writing, and discussing. Because of the articles we read by Sullivan, Carr, Hedges, and Thompson, I feel, in a way, like I'm one step ahead of my peers when it comes to the Internet. It's hard to explain, but before I had never really considered all that the Internet does for us. I mean, immediately it provides us with whatever news, entertainment, and/or information we could ever want, but it also has more long-term, and often hidden, effects. It changes the way we think, read, write, and interact with one another, which I had never slowed down enough to realize before. I guess I'm just excited to have this new outlook. And, even more, to feel like I've got a pretty good grasp of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)