Reading Response for Monday September 09
- Waldman (Chad) discusses McCulloch’s argument that the internet is making writing better. In what way does Waldman suggest writing is getting better? Do you agree?
Waldman suggests writing is getting better through the lens of McCulloh. He suggests that writing is advancing through the use of expression, which is shown by replacing our tone in “real life” with extension of words, emojis, and use of periods and commas to express what we truly mean to the fullest extent. The length of words we use online such as “yayyyy” can mimic the state of mind an individual is at. I do agree that this is improving our expression to almost match what we’re trying to communicate as well as creative writing, however I don’t believe it makes us better professional writers. I believe if we get too comfortable writing this way, it’ll be hard for us to express what we’re trying to convey in professional and serious settings due to reliance on informal writing.
2. Compose a brief response to the texts by McNamee (Asia) and Tufecki (Erin). Describe what you found most interesting/important and discuss one way these texts complicate or challenge Thompson.
McNamee is terrified by the damage being done to these internet monopolies. What I found most interesting about this text is how he describes his relationship with social media- he absolutely hates it. McNamee uses studies to illustrate how depressing social media is by comparing it to how much we invest in these corporations. He uses the rhetorical device of pathos to emphasize how these apps know you more than you know yourself. This text conflicts with Thompson’s agenda by every degree. Thompson is positively for these apps, while McNamee is not. Thompson demonstrates the benefits and strengths of online writing, as McNamee names every consequence there is to it.
Tufecki has analyzed the YouTube algorithm. What I found most interesting within this article is the comparison to our crave for fact, sugary, and salty foods. That YouTube provides an algorithm in which we crave and cannot get enough of which confirms McNamee underlying assumption that we are in a sense, “controlled” by these corporations. This also challenges Thompson’s article as it presents a not-so-great use of the internet. Tufecki examines how serious it is when young adults are reliant on YouTube for information, while Thompson argues that young people using media is an advancement.
You’re absolutely right people can get too comfortable in writing a certain way. It projects into professional writing already, and as a result, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to follow along with people’s ideas. You also did a great analysis of Tufecki’s article. I think this is the most realistic and most well-thought out of the readings we have.
LikeLike
I respectfully disagree that being able to write expressively (like “yayyy”) will have a negative effect on our ability to communicate professionally. It is definitely worth considering, but I trust that we know and can act on the difference between writing to a best friend and writing to a superior. It’s similar to how we are in real life and how we highlight different aspects of our personalities to different people. I’m silly with my friends but I know how to behave formally in front of hiring manager. This applies to our writing online. I’ve made countless typos and non-sensical texts to my friends, yet I’m still confident in my ability to draft a formal letter. Public thinking simply allows me to make my intentions visible for others. As long as schools continue to teach proper English, grammar, and rhetoric, I have no concerns for the future of communication.
LikeLike