After reading “Introduction: What is Rhetorical about Digital Rhetoric? Perspectives and Definition of Digital Rhetoric,” The first thing I’d like to say is...
HOWEVER! I think I understand, something.
Three major questions the author tries to uncover
A major issue was answering what is digital rhetoric. It’s a question which stumped many professionals, as stated by the author.
At the same time the author stated that knowing, was so valuable because it birthed the urgency “for further research, teaching, and collaboration.”
When the author stated a goal for the symposium was that...
I realized, this journal authored by Hodgson and Barnett is a classic case of using what we don’t know to gain a better understanding of what we do know, as well as to pin point areas we should focus our efforts in learning. In this case, we the audience and the members of the Indiana digital Rhetoric Sumposium will explore and learn more about digital rhetoric.
As stated by the author about, not clearly defining rhetoric....
Some major questions and answers:
-What do we mean by digital rhetoric?
“Digital rhetoricians see rhetoric as both a theory and an art of making and teaching.”
-What is rhetorical about digital rhetoric?
“Criticism and theory are distinctly rhetorical”
-Is it different from digital rhetoric and digital writing or digital humanities?
“When looking into the past we find that it’s pretty much the same”
Note: The author also states, “ to study Rhetoric was to learn specific concepts and strategies for persuasion as well as to perform those lessons through speech and writing.
When the author looks at persuasive writing (rhetoric), behavioral changes, and digital rhetoric, the author stated something which really stood out to me.
When analyzing the digital aspect of rhetoric, we have to look into technology, and the “what” about technology that is persuasive.
The “what” which is persuasive is computer algorithms. The author states, computer algorithms are persuasive agents that effectively transmit cultural values and beliefs through structures of code and language.
The authors at the symposium propose, the algorithms are able to learn about us and deliver messages to our digital devices via “text”
What these statements say to me is, through studying different platforms and the users who use them, when can develop statistical data about a population. With that data we can then figure out how to persuade the users with what they see on the internet social media platforms they use.
The author makes another interesting point stating, “instead of criticizing technology and our inability to focus through deep attention...that maybe it’s how we understand attention that needs revising.”
Essentially stating, that with the change and use of technology, society has learned to learn differently. The way to hold attention has changed as well. By looking into computer algorithms and patterns in how users use technology, we can learn how to persuade the user if we learn how to hold their attention. By learning how to hold attention, we can “enable an environment for dynamic discourse”
One last point the authors brought up was identifying the multimodal modeof preference which is image/video.
Manipulating all these areas, can create a emotional connections in a sensible way for viewer.
The big take away is, rhetoric is ever shifting, technology is always changing at a rapid pace, and people are changing as well. Everyone has unique way to learn and uses technology to learn uniquely too. Technology is becoming such a fundamental part of life that interaction with it is changing how we learn. Not only must we understand how to use technology, we must better understand how the user uses technology, all in efforts to send a message. Not just any old message, rhetoric.
A prediction, as we understand more and more about people, technology, and digital rhetoric, education systems will change, as well as how corporate America delivers their messages.
In my profession as an athletic trainer, we are given many skill sets. One skill sets is rehabilitation. Now rehab can be boring and most likely the outcome will produce results, however exercises will become mundane and patient outcomes will most likely be mediocre. The overall outcome can be optimized if we create a program with purpose. Not just any purpose, patient centered purpose. With a better idea of what interests the patient, we can come up with a dynamic rehab program custom tailored made to achieve patient desired goals. With understanding of how the patient operates, and an understanding the rehab process we can “persuade” the patient by presenting them with purposeful exercise and treatment techniques, which will hold their attention better than the mundane exercises, ultimately, enhancing the patients experience, and achieving optimal patient outcomes.
I chose this photo of #ripBruceLee facing off with his tallest opponent in a movie named “The Game of Death” reason being, I believe it’s a prime example of rhetoric. #ripBruceLee is out to send one message persuade his audience and the people in that tower he’s the best martial artist in the world by entering a tower which has one way of getting out, being victorious. In this movie #ripBruceLee tests his martial arts skills in what maybe the greatest display of adaptation. There’s a total of 7 floors and EVERY floor has a different opponent with a different fighting style. Pretend each floor is an audience, and his martial arts is a tool, and #ripBruceLee is the user. He must take his martial arts, understand his users, then adapt his style to best his opponent, sending a very persuasive message, he is the best. Convincing right... there’s an environment of deep learning as well question asking and answering, “have I practiced enough” “is my opponent really better than me” etc. One thing is certain in this movie, the best martial artist is the one who can adapt to change, much like rhetoricians and digital rhetoric.
