Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
The pun was a good idea. Just in the first paragraph, I felt the same way as she did. Being equine, like many others, I always think, what good will writing do for me? FYC is there for people to learn the skills of writing. It’s for future writing abilities. Even though it may seem pointless, it is there to be the foundation of your writing skills. What I also relate to is her experience of what she learned. For example, she lists the “groundworks of her future writing life”.
*how I could use writing to think through my newly forming ideas;
• how a piece of writing always has an audience;
• how to locate, evaluate, and incorporate sources;
• and how important it is to get meaningful feedback so that I could produce better writing and become a better writer.I enjoy reading Gladstone because of it’s comic form. It’s a quick and easy read but includes a lot of facts and detail. Reading about the different types of biases was quite interesting. I already had knowledge of biases in the news and media, but I had no idea about access biases, or didn’t know much about commercial biases. I do believe that much of the bias that exists can fall under the category of narrative or visual. We tend to see more biases in newspapers because it’s what we usually see first, or is what catches our attention first.
I really liked how it started off with her personal story of her career. It was eye catching and fun to read. She talks about her experiences in an informal way. I am not personally a fan of science, but she makes science sound fun.
I liked how she referred to different texts, like Sherlock Holmes, or the Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks. This also participated in keeping my attention. I enjoyed the style of story telling, or narrating that she used.
The way she described science was interesting. She said that “science, after all, is a quest, and as such it’s one of the oldest and most enduring stories we have”. In that specific paragraph, she describes science in a fascinating way. For example, she writes, “perhaps most of all, it’s about women and men possessed by curiosity, people who devote their lives to pursuits the rest of us mystifying or terrifying-chasing viruses, finding undiscovered plants, dusting off dinosaurs or teasing venomous snakes”.
I enjoy reading Gladstone because it is easy to follow and understand. This topic was quite interesting to me because, prior knowledge, any sort of reporters are looked down upon. Us, as viewers and readers, want to hear what we want to hear. When a journalist says something that we don’t like, we “attack”. The same thing goes for big news reporters. They, however, tend to be more biased. They aren’t always true to detail.
The tone I got was stating a lot of information in a way that anyone can follow. They made it so we would keep up with what they’re saying, but not in a way that we would get bored or lost. Their use of famous figures and analogies captured attention because they used a dog to represent a journalist. Not many other articles would do that.
The intended audience is geared towards any English major, or anyone who wants to get involved with the news. It reaches out to English majors because there is a lot of work that goes into reporting. You need to think about the audience, the tone, pathos, logos, or ethos. You can’t do news without English skills. It also includes the to-be journalists because it talks about what they mean to society, or public. It also can prepare them for what can be the reaction. It’s usually not good.
When I started reading this, I became lost very quickly. I agree with you that this is more scholarly. It took me a while to learn what he meant about discourses. I finally understood with the few examples in the beginning. For example, when he used the two women interview, and how they used their language. Also, when he used the bar example. It also helped when he named off the different categories like factory worker, an administrator etc. However, I still had a troublesome time trying to understand everything else he is saying.
I agree with you, Alex, of how if he used more relatable examples it would be much easier to understand. As much as I re-read a lot of the paragraphs, my brain could not wrap around his sayings. To me, everything just blended together, into a giant ball of confusion. I didn’t really understand what he was talking about how ” literacy must be couched in terms of the notion of Discourse” (Gee). I also don’t really know where the story of the 5 and 7 year old came in. Overall, I was quite confused.
I agree of how this piece was a little more on the ‘less-interesting’ end of the spectrum. It did, however, manage to get the point across of why visuals are important, and when they should be used.
One early point, to me, was the comparison of the museum. One picture showed just the outline of all the museums, while the other showed the whole package. It had a small picture of the museum, a brief description, and where it was. This is a good example of when to use visuals. For example, if you’re a tourist, you’d rather want to know what the building looked like, and where it was, rather than just looking at a boring, and confusing map.
“Images and graphics are especially common in certain kinds of writing. Even information that is easy to follow with words alone sometimesbecomes much easier to understand with graphics” (Picturing Texts). Almost everything is easier to understand if there is a visual. The example they used was the pie chart for the different elements that make up Earth. It’s not easy to visualize 78% of nitrogen, or 21% oxygen. This pretty much sums up that visuals are great because it makes whatever someone is trying to explain much easier for us.
“Words can be highlighted, boldfaced, capitalized, or italicized to draw a reader’s attention or to add emphasis where desired. And readers typically follow a predictable path, starting at the beginning and reading to the end. With visual texts, a reader’s eye is more free to go where it will. The reader of a visual text will read the many details of the entire image simultaneously in an instant. Then almost immediately, the eyes begin to wander around the image, caught and directed by the details that attract them” (Picturing Texts). Manipulating words, like bold facing, or highlighting can help us visualize whats being described. However, if it’s just all or mostly just visual, then the readers will be able to ‘explore’ more freely because there aren’t any words constraining us.
Alyssa, you did a fantastic job briefing over what Dirk was saying in his work. I can wholly agree with you that this piece was much easier to follow and stick with because of it’s informal tone. I can personally say that it amazes me of how much more there is to genres. Like you said, I really only knew of genres because of music or movies. I find it quite interesting that how even though something looks completely different, it can still be the same genre.
I agree with your point of how in earlier school years, everything was given to us. Yes it was easy, but it took away our ability to be creative and do what we wanted.
