Jimmy Wales and Andrew Keen Debate Web 2.0

Jimmy Wales has created what could be considered the one encyclopedia to rule them all. It has more entries and less errors than Britannica, a pretty big accomplishment. This is all due in part to the Web 2.0 revolution.

On the other side of the coin, Andrew Keen brought up some good points. Who are posting these articles? How accurate are they? And how can an outsider know what is more important, Pokemon or Shakespeare?

Web 2.0, in my opinion, has brought society to a new level. And I think it is a good thing. I can get on Facebook and find old friends from elementary school. I can post links to my friends that I find funny. It's a social HUB that most people are on. People can Tweet what they're doing and millions of followers instantly know. It is a social and cultural revolution.

When I want to find information on a topic, my first stop is Wikipedia. Because it's reliable and I know it's all true? No. Because I know hundreds of people have reviewed that article and it has plenty of sources at the bottom. I can go to those sources and see corresponding information that helps me back up the information I was looking for. Just as Facebook is a social HUB, Wikipedia is a knowledge HUB.

Andrew Keen has good points about anonymity and not knowing who exactly is contributing, but I disagree in that they NEED monetary compensation. If they wanted it, they would ask. Wikipedia is not "dumbing down" users. Articles are based on sourced documents. Wikipedia is just a compilation of information.

I have to side with Jimmy Wales, especially since he is doing this non-profit, not even charging people to access this plethora of information. What harm has Wikipedia done?

Groups: Good or Bad?

As I continue to catch up on my blog I did want to touch on what we spoke about in class: groups. Helpful or harmful? It usually depends on the person, but I have to say the overall structure of a group can lead to much better things than an individual person can produce. Someone can prefer to work alone, but the potential a group has can lead to more productivity and ultimately better results. This is of course dependent on who is in your group.

Based on my experience in Computer Science, if you know who is in their group, what they have done, and what they are capable of doing, the group context is perfect. For example a project I had just last week, our group knocked it out within a few hours. We laid it all out, what needed to be done, who should do what, and how we should do it. We knew each other's strengths and weaknesses and helped each other along the way.

Had I done that project alone, I would have not only had a huge workload, but been confused and had no one there to help me figure it out. I would have no one to bounce ideas off of, ask opinions, and give me advice. I probably would have gotten frustrated and just given up.

A group is a valuable asset, but given the group can work together efficiently and without confrontation. Debate is welcomed as that is how you can come to conclusions, but pure confrontation does nothing but hurt a group.

The reading... Or poem?

Ok so I just need to read these authors...

NEXT CLASS:

What? This is a poem? Ok, time to decode this riddle... 

So it looks like a cross... Religious?

Religious names... Ok we got something here.

Rose, vine? Definitely got something going on...

How can a list of authors become a religious poem? Point of view. How you look at something, based on your background. People told that it is a list of authors they need to read see it as that. People told that it is a poem, think that it is a poem (Religious, specifically). So how did they actually see it as a poem?

We see certain things in content that does not contain said certain thing. Example: We tend to see faces in scrambled images, because faces are ingrained in our mind. This class of students see the list as a poem because it is not only what they thought, but what they have been told. They use what they have been taught, what they know, and apply it to what is in front of them. It may not make total sense, but their elder, the teacher, tells them that this is a poem. When someone gets an idea, others go with it, it's a simple follow the leader mentality. 

So why is it a poem? I am told so. I see some evidence of religious poem in it, and my peers agree. Why would I go against that? The power of persuasion.

I have fallen behind...

Senior Year has lived up to it's reputation as being extremely busy, with ridiculous projects constantly thrown at me. So I have fallen behind a few blogs. But we did speak about something recently that I have had some experience with...

Copyright. It's not your's, it's mine. It's not mine, it's yours. Wait, whose is it? It's a sticky issue, especially on the brink of today's technology where a song or movie that costs so much money to create can be downloaded free of charge. I have personally learned about it by getting a letter from NBC after illegal downloading one of their shows. Call me a pirate, but I missed the show and this was before Hulu. Keep in mind it was a warning, but a warning like that lets you know just how serious something like this is. 

People have gone to jail over downloading an album. People have been sued for downloading a song. It has gotten to a point where copyright is the name of the game, and if you don'e play by the rules, you are out. But how is something copyrighted? Any original piece of material you create is automatically copyrighted. But use an image on the internet, and you are in violation. Why? IT'S NOT YOUR IMAGE! You MUST cite where the image came from or you are illegally using someone else's photograph. 

In Computer Science we learned that depending on the programming language we use, our program can be copywritten just by creating it, otherwise we have to submit it to a specific license to have it copywritten. So not everything you make has a copyright, but watch out. If you download movies and music, might want to think twice, because seeing a movie a few months before it hits DVD is not worth a $10,000 fine.

Audience and Instructions

When we usually think of audience we think of who is listening or reading what we produce. While this is true, it changes how you should speak or how you should write. What you produce needs to be aimed at the audience and have intention for them. As Lannon tells us in the reading, you need to ask yourself questions like "Are the readers superiors or subordinates?", "What do they already know about the topic?", "How much do they care?", and some important questions like "How may cultural differences play a role?"

Instructions are a specific type of rhetoric in that there is no need to persuade, the intent is to instruct. This also changes how the document needs to be prepared. The intention is to teach the audience how to do a specific task or how to use a product. Lannon mentions that for ethical and legal reasons, companies want people to use the product ethically and safely. One must also know why people want this information and how they will use it. Do they need step-by-step instructions or is the information something they can read and instantly understand?

While taking the audience into consideration, one must think about the technical background of those reading the instructions. For example, if you wanted to instruct someone on how to upgrade RAM in a computer, you wouldn't just say "Open your computer and remove the old RAM" because although some computer-savvy people may know how to do that, the everyday computer user would have no idea where to begin. Culture also needs to be considered as different cultures have different ways they like to obtain information. Lannon gives us the example of German people and how they value thoroughness and complexity.

Finally, Lannon gives us a checklist to ensure our instructions are right for the audience.

• Content - too much or too little?
• Organization - is it hard to follow?
• Page design - Too much going on? Too many steps? Too big paragraphs?
• Ethical/Legal/Cultural considerations - Cross-cultural problems? Distortion of facts?

If we follow Lannon's guidelines, instructions should not only appeal to the audience, but help them through the process easily without any distortion of facts and making it easy to follow.

Obama's Speech: A Look into Rhetoric

In class we read Obama's speech on the Muslim occasion of Ramadan. It was an interesting speech in that it had a specific audience, but was meant to reach much farther than that. While he addressed it to the Muslim people, being the President, he knew the nation would hear him. He took this opportunity to express his opinions on the "Ground Zero Mosque" which he explains is about eleven blocks away from Ground Zero and is a mosque for Muslims, who have lost more lives to Al Queda than Americans have.

According to Blitzer, the exigence in this speech would be the controversy surrounding the mosque being built. There are many opposed to it, but most of them are misinformed and only hear "Ground Zero Mosque" which they think means "Terrorist Memorial at Ground Zero." Little do they know the mosque is for Muslims, who despite what they might think, were not in any way involved in the 9/11 attacks. Constraints are people or events that can alter the exigence, in this case it would be those building the mosque, as well as various other people. Obama is actually not a constraint as he can not change the outcome, only inform people about the situation.

Blitzer's last part was audience, which as discussed earlier, the audience in this situation is complicated as it is directed at Muslims, with the entire nation, and world for that matter, in mind. Obama is trying to convey to the American people and those opposed to the mosque that there is nothing to be upset about.

I think this was a good assignment, I can definitely see how rhetoric was used in this situation, and how Blitzer's analysis of rhetoric fits in here.