Untitled

[meghansdigitalresponses]

When "Cuteness" Becomes an Ethical Concern

Thinking about the apps I use daily, I realize how much they rely on amazing designs to encourage people to continue using the technology. Reading Sara Wachter-Boettcher's "Tracked, Tagged, and Targeted" chapter in Technically Wrong made me question the real intention behind all of these "cute" aspects of technology that content strategists create.

Wachter-Boettcher points out in this chapter that "cuteness becomes another cloak for tech companies: a shiny object that deflects criticism." I took this to mean that everything they create is a distraction to keep users engaged. So, while I'm busy scrolling through classic rock music edits on Instagram, companies gather data about me without me even realizing it.

This is a huge ethical concern for content creators to consider because it would make me question their intentions. In this sense, I would think companies care more about keeping us distracted and stealing our data than about actually creating content they think we'll enjoy.

In my opinion, transparency is the solution to this. I think it's more important to create content that's equally as engaging as it is truthful. Users should know how their data is being used! Wachter-Boettcher's argument highlighted this for me because she talked about "paternalistic playfulness" and how it can turn us into passive consumers.

[meghansdigitalresponses]

Why Plain Language Matters

In today's world, I feel like people want to find information quickly and easily. Everyone has questions, important assignments to complete, and information they need to know. However, it can be tough to find accessible, effective information if the content is filled with sentences that are hard to understand or phrases that aren't easily recognizable. That's where plain language comes in, as I believe it's the most important factor to consider when creating effective web content.

Sarah Horton and Whitney Quesenbery, in A Web for Everyone: Designing Accessible User Experiences, emphasize in Chapter 8: "Plain Language: Creates a Conversation," plain language is about making sure people can find, understand, and use information effectively. They define it as a behavioral measure, asking: "Can the people who are the audience for the material quickly and easily find what they need? Understand what they find? Act appropriately on that understanding?"

Horton and Quesenbery also point out that "people are in a hurry, get distracted, or miss a critical word in a paragraph." This reminds me that everyone accesses content differently, and it won't be the same experience for every user. That's why I think plain language can benefit everyone because, as Horton and Quesenbery emphasize, different audiences share similar needs when it comes to usability. Whether it's teens with short attention spans or adults who are "cautious clickers," I think everyone can benefit from more straightforward writing because it's clearer to understand.

[meghansdigitalresponses]

Why Accessibility Matters

For digital writers and designers, I feel like their jobs are about ensuring everyone can access and use the content they create. While they want the content to sound good and engage people, none of that matters if everyone can't access it. According to Horton and Quesenbery in A Web for Everyone, "When websites and applications are badly designed, they create barriers that exclude people from using the web as it was intended." They explain that accessibility is about designing in a way that gets rid of barriers for everyone else. They also make the argument that "disability is a conflict between someone's functional capability and the world we have constructed." In my opinion, this means that poor designs are usually what makes content inaccessible, so it's not always the designer's fault.

I would say understanding the audience is really important in this sense. For example, according to Horton and Quesenbery in People First: Designing for Differences, "You have to know the people you are designing for. And that includes people with disabilities." They emphasize the importance of considering the needs of various different types of users, such as people with disabilities or people with low literacy levels. They also point out that one person's need for accessibility can be very different from someone else's, stating, "Be careful not to assume that feedback from one person with a disability applies to all people with disabilities." I would say this is one of the most important statements from the text because it ensures all accessibility needs and accommodations are inclusive, and it's also why accessibility matters to so many digital writers and designers. They don't want anyone to feel left out!

[meghansdigitalresponses]

How I Interpret Intertextuality in Rhetoric

I understand intertextuality to be all about how texts connect to and influence each other. It’s when a piece of media, such as a book, movie, or song, builds on another piece of media in order to create new meaning. I feel this idea can take on a whole new level in digital spaces. According to Douglas Eyman in Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice, digital intertextuality makes it so we can have even greater connections because “contemporary users of Web-based discourse have at their fingertips resources that enable them to seek out information in the moment in order to more fully understand and appreciate an intertextual reference” (Eyman, 34).

When analyzing this topic, I like to think about how memes work online. Memes can use scenes from popular TV shows, add text, and instantly create a joke that spreads across social media. The only issue is that you must examine the original reference to understand why it's funny, but this is obviously a lot easier to accomplish in the digital world since you can quickly search the internet for it.