Choosing a genre for any of the projects greatly impacts what the content of the project will be. Matching a certain kind of genre is key to effectively conveying what the author is trying to say. One must consider which context would fit the topic the best. For example, I would feel more comfortable doing project 4 as a video project or podcast. This could vary between students but the decision remains just as important.
I am committing to the college essay genre because of the large amount of research needed to illustrate both sides. My controversy is based off the research of two parties and I feel like I could present the research properly in an essay. The other genres would not work for my particular genre because the large amount of research would take away from the other aspects of the genres. For example, trying to fit in research information into a video or podcast would seem forced and stick out too much. Most research is published in some kind of written form and with it playing such a large part in my first project, the college essay would be the best genre to support it.
Since most of my high school career was writing essays, I feel I have a good feel for some aspects of this genre. I feel comfortable with my tone, word choice, and keeping the essay "professional". This week I plan to do more research on the format of a college essay. I want to be able to know the exact format I will use, including spacing, font, text size, and other specific aspects in order to be as precise as possible. I will also look up certain parts of the essay in our textbook including intro and concluding paragraphs. Hopefully all these aspects will produce a more college appropriate essay in which I can present the research in an effective way.
I feel good about production week in regards to the amount of research I have. I feel like I have all the information I need. The challenges I think I will have this week is forming my position and planning out my essay. Since most of my presentation will be explaining how the research of both sides effect the situation, I do not know if I should present this information completely unbiased or if I should input my opinion.
Saturday, January 30, 2016
Cluster of Stakeholders
The center of my cluster is the accusation of Lumosity falsely advertising their protect to improve cognitive performance in daily life. There were two sides in my cluster, one being Lumosity and the other being a team of researchers from various labs and the FTC (Federal Trade Commission). Since this controversy stems from false advertising, it was somewhat clear what is at stake for both sides. Lumosity wants to protect its brand while the FTC and researcher want to expose malpractice and false advertising.
Here is my cluster
Here is my cluster
Evaluation of General Sources
My controversial topic in the field of neuroscience is how the company Lumosity advertised cognitive improvement with their "brain games". Researchers have found that these claims are not backed by actual science and do not prove any actual improvement. These findings led the Federal Trade Commission to charge Lumos Labs (the laboratory behind Lumosity) 2 million dollars.
This is the first online source I used to gain some background knowledge.
The url ends in .org. This indicates that the site is noncommercial. Having the organization be noncommercial indicates a more reliable source than a .com url. While this does not guarantee credibility, it is a good start.
The author of the article is Emily Underwood and a description of her background is provided with a hyperlink to her name. She has a masters degree in science writing from John Hopkins University and a bachelors degree in science and technology studies with a focus in neuroscience from Brown University.
The last time the page was updated was Oct. 22, 2014. While the article was dated over a year ago, as I researched more, I found the information matched other recent sources. The page also has multiple links, that work, showing specific examples including research papers and games talked about in the article.
The position of the subject and the purpose align with each other as the website seems to be to inform. With heavy evidence of research, the author aims to shed light on why Lumosity is being charged and the reasoning behind why the research was done in the first place. She does present a counter argument about how these brain training games work and that no brain game can actually be proven to improve cognition in daily life. While the science does not support Lumosity, she attempts to legally defend the company.
There is only one graphic on this page and it is of an elderly woman playing a game on a computer. This picture serves to illustrate the environment in which Lumosity takes place but does not seem to evoke an emotional response from the reader.
The next source is very credible.
The url ends in .gov. This is very promising because it means this website is part of the government. All information presented should be trusted and credible.
Assuming because this is a government website, there is no author available to look up. If this was not a government website, this would be alarming.
The last time this page was updated was Jan. 5, 2016. This is very recent and serves as a good sign that the information presented is accumulative, including all pieces of information.
The links present on the page largely include hyperlinks to many policies created by the FTC. This is used to further explain how Lumosity was in the wrong. All of the links are still working.
With all of these links, it is evident that this article's purpose is to inform the public, or as the FTC would say the "consumer". It is their job to make sure that the consumer is well informed about the products on the market, and that the companies selling the product are not falsely advertising. This puts the FTC in a very unbiased position. They do not care what the product is or who is involved, but rather that all of their policies are satisfied.
There are only two main graphics on this page, one being the logo for the FTC and one representing Lumosity's brand. They do not aim to persuade the reader, but rather illustrate the parties present.
This is the first online source I used to gain some background knowledge.
The url ends in .org. This indicates that the site is noncommercial. Having the organization be noncommercial indicates a more reliable source than a .com url. While this does not guarantee credibility, it is a good start.
The author of the article is Emily Underwood and a description of her background is provided with a hyperlink to her name. She has a masters degree in science writing from John Hopkins University and a bachelors degree in science and technology studies with a focus in neuroscience from Brown University.
The last time the page was updated was Oct. 22, 2014. While the article was dated over a year ago, as I researched more, I found the information matched other recent sources. The page also has multiple links, that work, showing specific examples including research papers and games talked about in the article.
The position of the subject and the purpose align with each other as the website seems to be to inform. With heavy evidence of research, the author aims to shed light on why Lumosity is being charged and the reasoning behind why the research was done in the first place. She does present a counter argument about how these brain training games work and that no brain game can actually be proven to improve cognition in daily life. While the science does not support Lumosity, she attempts to legally defend the company.
There is only one graphic on this page and it is of an elderly woman playing a game on a computer. This picture serves to illustrate the environment in which Lumosity takes place but does not seem to evoke an emotional response from the reader.
The next source is very credible.
The url ends in .gov. This is very promising because it means this website is part of the government. All information presented should be trusted and credible.
Assuming because this is a government website, there is no author available to look up. If this was not a government website, this would be alarming.
The last time this page was updated was Jan. 5, 2016. This is very recent and serves as a good sign that the information presented is accumulative, including all pieces of information.
The links present on the page largely include hyperlinks to many policies created by the FTC. This is used to further explain how Lumosity was in the wrong. All of the links are still working.
With all of these links, it is evident that this article's purpose is to inform the public, or as the FTC would say the "consumer". It is their job to make sure that the consumer is well informed about the products on the market, and that the companies selling the product are not falsely advertising. This puts the FTC in a very unbiased position. They do not care what the product is or who is involved, but rather that all of their policies are satisfied.
There are only two main graphics on this page, one being the logo for the FTC and one representing Lumosity's brand. They do not aim to persuade the reader, but rather illustrate the parties present.
Reddit and What I Found There
Reddit is a great place for people to voice their opinions or ask controversial subjects. With so many subreddits, there is little that is not covered. People are opinionated and are not afraid to speak their mind. This will lead to many interesting discussions, providing perspective from various angles.
In r/neuroscience, there are three main types of threads that occur the most: discussion, article, and question. Like the twitter posts, a thread tagged with article will link to another website where a detailed article explains the subject. This makes up about 1/3 of the posts in r/neuroscience. The majority of the rest is made up of discussion and question posts. The main difference in the two is that a question post will have a very specific question that can usually be answered and the discussion posts are more open for interpretation. Often times the discussion will get theoretical. This theoretical area of discussions leads to many disagreements but never escalate to personal disputes. Most of the time the discussions stay respectful and productive.
One of the first discussion posts I clicked on provided great ideas that interested me. Here is the post. The post started with a question of, "does the brain have original (not based off experience) thoughts?" This question interested me because I learned last semester how important the experiences we have as children are in development. As I reviewed the main ideas of how our brain develops and behaves i could not think of a case where original thought exists. As I read through the comments I enjoyed following this collective train of thought as it evolved into a more complicated question, ending with quantum mechanics.
The second discussion post that resonated with me was more of a question post. The initial question had to do with how genes are turned on and off with epigenetics. I enjoyed this post because every commenter added something new to further help the person that posted the question understand. The first commenter left a long, detailed explanation of how genes are turned on and off. Then the next commenter expands on some aspect mentioned of the first comment. This repeats until almost no aspect of the question is unanswered. I was very impressed in the amount of effort people put into their comments, just to answer a random person's question.
I was not surprised with the kind of posts relating to actual neuroscience questions and articles. I expected to see a lot of factual information and hypothetical conversations. I did not, however, expect to see more personal posts. Every once in a while a post will come up asking for career or personal advice. I was also surprised to see how many users commented good, thought out advice.
In r/neuroscience, there are three main types of threads that occur the most: discussion, article, and question. Like the twitter posts, a thread tagged with article will link to another website where a detailed article explains the subject. This makes up about 1/3 of the posts in r/neuroscience. The majority of the rest is made up of discussion and question posts. The main difference in the two is that a question post will have a very specific question that can usually be answered and the discussion posts are more open for interpretation. Often times the discussion will get theoretical. This theoretical area of discussions leads to many disagreements but never escalate to personal disputes. Most of the time the discussions stay respectful and productive.
One of the first discussion posts I clicked on provided great ideas that interested me. Here is the post. The post started with a question of, "does the brain have original (not based off experience) thoughts?" This question interested me because I learned last semester how important the experiences we have as children are in development. As I reviewed the main ideas of how our brain develops and behaves i could not think of a case where original thought exists. As I read through the comments I enjoyed following this collective train of thought as it evolved into a more complicated question, ending with quantum mechanics.
The second discussion post that resonated with me was more of a question post. The initial question had to do with how genes are turned on and off with epigenetics. I enjoyed this post because every commenter added something new to further help the person that posted the question understand. The first commenter left a long, detailed explanation of how genes are turned on and off. Then the next commenter expands on some aspect mentioned of the first comment. This repeats until almost no aspect of the question is unanswered. I was very impressed in the amount of effort people put into their comments, just to answer a random person's question.
I was not surprised with the kind of posts relating to actual neuroscience questions and articles. I expected to see a lot of factual information and hypothetical conversations. I did not, however, expect to see more personal posts. Every once in a while a post will come up asking for career or personal advice. I was also surprised to see how many users commented good, thought out advice.
Evaluation of News Magazine Stories
Woody Harrelson on Reddit
The controversy in this story is the manor in which Woody Harrelson answered an AMA session on Reddit. While AMA stands for "ask me anything", Woody Harrelson did not answer anything. Treating the thread as more of a talk show, Harrelson related every answer to his upcoming movie Rampart. Reddit users have a particular position on free speech and see Reddit as a platform to express one's personal views. Harrelson's seemingly "PR approved" responses were quickly called out by the users asking questions, turning a simple AMA into a feud between fans and Woody Harrelson.
It is hard for me to decide who I should feel more sympathetic for because I can see where both sides are coming from. I believe Woody Harrelson was not aware of what he was getting into, as explained by one of Reddit's AMA moderators. However, "ask me anything" does seem clear enough for him to understand what people will be asking. I greatly sympathize for the fans wanting to ask legitimate questions. Reddit's AMA section is an unprecedented opportunity to talk to celebrities and other interesting people. Since Woody Harrelson seems to be so open about his opinions, I can understand the disappointment of his fans when he answered with non-answers.
The character I sympathize the least with in this story is the person responsible for Woody Harrelson's responses. Whether this person is Woody Harrelson or some PR agent, they should have been aware of Reddit's environment. It would only take 15 minutes to figure out the procedure for AMAs. Plenty of other famous people have done them and received the same treatment.
Trump vs. Fox News
In the preceding days of the Republican debate of Jan. 28, 2016, Donald Trump demanded that mediator Megyn Kelly be removed from the debate. He claimed that Megyn Kelly would treat him unfairly, based off of previous arguments. Fox responded by asking Trump to imagine himself in a similar situation with Vladimir Putin. If he can not handle a debate with Megyn Kelly, how could he sit down with Putin?
When dealing with Fox and Donald Trump, it is hard to feel sympathy for either side. In this situation I would sympathize the most with Megyn Kelly because she is really just doing her job. With such an outlandish character as Donald Trump, it would be irresponsible for Megyn Kelly not to criticize him. As a reporter, Megyn Kelly should be encouraged to express these criticisms and not be silenced for them.
The least sympathetic character in this story is Donald Trump. Like a crybaby he demanded the removal of something he does not like. As a businessman, father, and presidential candidate, Trump should have a higher tolerance for these kinds of personal arguments. While he did endure some harsh exchanges between himself and Megyn Kelly, the blows came from both sides. If Trump was a polite, respectable candidate I would probably sympathize with him more. Unfortunately, we all know this is not the case.
Friday, January 29, 2016
Twitter and What I Found There
While it is well known that Twitter is a great platform for personal expression, it is also just a great platform for information in general. There are no limits to what can be talked about, and with Twitter's popularity, who will see it. I narrowed my search to a "neuroscience" scope and read a lot of interesting posts. Most of the posts had fairly complicated topics and needed a link to some other website to really get into detail about the subject.
A very large amount of the neuroscience related posts on Twitter involve some kind of new study, discovery, or question. Since not everybody is an expert in neuroscience, the only people that really contribute to the neuroscience areas of Twitter are universities, laboratories, and other credited establishments. If any normal people post about neuroscience, they usually refer to these establishments with a link. Since most of these posts are from credited places, there is not too much debate, but rather questions or comments. Most readers will simply be learning information from these posts.
One post directed me here with a link. The actual Twitter post had only the title of the linked article and #neuroscience. I was instantly drawn to this post because of its claim to have found a mechanism that causes memory loss. This is a very big deal in neuroscience because of how big of a role memory plays in human function. It is also a major problem for the very common Alzheimer's Disease. As a neuroscientist , or any biological research profession, the goal is to identify specific mechanisms and their role in the living organism. This allows breakthroughs that solve various medical problems. Solving the issue of memory loss could potentially help millions of people around the world. Learning about Alzheimer's from my neuroscience class last semester and from people I know made me extremely interested in the subject. Not only is the biological reasoning complicated and intricate, but it is also a very prominent disease worldwide. This article was very promising as it described certain mechanisms that could help memory loss, and it left me optimistic for future research.
This other post that stood out to me was this one. Even though the post was in Spanish, I knew what the picture was. It is the mapping of nerves in a certain part of the brain. After reading through so many articles, it was refreshing to just enjoy a picture of the brain. Not only is the picture colorful and nice to look at, but it has some meaning to it. Scientists do not just perform these expensive studies to produce pretty picture, they are also mapping certain tracks of nerves to see how and when they are fired. When I look at this picture I see how complicated the brain is and enjoy the thought that I have one in my head.
I was not surprised with what I found on Twitter. With a topic like neuroscience, or any specific science, there is not a lot of room to debate or argue. Most scientists would leave the arguing to more scholarly platforms. I did not expect, however, the extent to which new and relevant stories were being shared. I expected somewhat limited posts, either in when they were posted or from where. I found there was a large variety of stories from a continuous stream.
A very large amount of the neuroscience related posts on Twitter involve some kind of new study, discovery, or question. Since not everybody is an expert in neuroscience, the only people that really contribute to the neuroscience areas of Twitter are universities, laboratories, and other credited establishments. If any normal people post about neuroscience, they usually refer to these establishments with a link. Since most of these posts are from credited places, there is not too much debate, but rather questions or comments. Most readers will simply be learning information from these posts.
One post directed me here with a link. The actual Twitter post had only the title of the linked article and #neuroscience. I was instantly drawn to this post because of its claim to have found a mechanism that causes memory loss. This is a very big deal in neuroscience because of how big of a role memory plays in human function. It is also a major problem for the very common Alzheimer's Disease. As a neuroscientist , or any biological research profession, the goal is to identify specific mechanisms and their role in the living organism. This allows breakthroughs that solve various medical problems. Solving the issue of memory loss could potentially help millions of people around the world. Learning about Alzheimer's from my neuroscience class last semester and from people I know made me extremely interested in the subject. Not only is the biological reasoning complicated and intricate, but it is also a very prominent disease worldwide. This article was very promising as it described certain mechanisms that could help memory loss, and it left me optimistic for future research.
This other post that stood out to me was this one. Even though the post was in Spanish, I knew what the picture was. It is the mapping of nerves in a certain part of the brain. After reading through so many articles, it was refreshing to just enjoy a picture of the brain. Not only is the picture colorful and nice to look at, but it has some meaning to it. Scientists do not just perform these expensive studies to produce pretty picture, they are also mapping certain tracks of nerves to see how and when they are fired. When I look at this picture I see how complicated the brain is and enjoy the thought that I have one in my head.
I was not surprised with what I found on Twitter. With a topic like neuroscience, or any specific science, there is not a lot of room to debate or argue. Most scientists would leave the arguing to more scholarly platforms. I did not expect, however, the extent to which new and relevant stories were being shared. I expected somewhat limited posts, either in when they were posted or from where. I found there was a large variety of stories from a continuous stream.
Evaluation of New York Times Stories
22 Clinton Emails
With the 2016 presidential race approaching Iowa, there is a lot of focus on the candidates and the actions they choose to make. This New York Times article reveals that 22 of the emails sent from Senator Clinton's unclassified server were tagged as "too classified" to be released to the public. This is important not only for her campaign's sake, but also her legal situation.
Hilary Clinton could not be closer to the center of this story. Every perspective has some kind of connection or focus on her. Whether it is her competition or her supporters, the article explains how Senator Clinton is directly influencing every situation. She is the one legally responsible and the one that will ultimately have to deal with the consequences.
Since the investigation of Senator Clinton's email controversy is happening in Washington D.C., the physical setting is technically there. However, this kind of national security issue, tied in with a presidential race, has a national platform. Anyone that is voting or cares about the presidential race, or our national security, would be interested in hearing this story. This seems to be the case with any controversial story that has a presidential candidate involved. Both sides must pay attention, either to support or defend the main character involved.
Like the polarized world of politics, there are two stubborn sides of this argument. The opposing side, non-Hilary supporters, tries to argue that Senator Clinton would be an irresponsible candidate. Sharing classified information on an unclassified and insecure server would put the U.S. in harms way. On the other hand, Hilary supporters, and Hilary herself, claim that the emails were not classified and that the whole controversy is being used as a political tool to bash the Senator.
For both sides the presidential candidacy is at stake. Voters have to pick one side. That decision will ultimately impact the presidential race in some way shape or form.
Apple Invests in Virtual Reality
As technology advances, businesses try to invest in the most promising developments. This is the case for virtual reality technology. Reaching platforms such as social media, movies, video games, and other media outlets, virtual reality will have many niches in future entertainment. This promise grabs the attention of any business that can afford to invest in it.
This article focuses on Apple and their decision to buy Flyby Media, an augmented reality start-up. While Apple seems to be the main character of this story, the article starts to widen its focus and talk about virtual reality in general. While mentioning other investing companies such as Facebook and Google, the article always comes back to Apple. While the first part of the article focuses on the actions Apple already made, the second half compares what other companies have done and what Apple could do.
There is not a specific setting for this story because the focus of the article is a product, virtual reality. There is never any location mentioned, as most of the article is hypothetical and speculation. The only action that can be tied to a specific location is the act of Apple buying Flyby Media. However, this detail has little relevance to the focus of the article.
There is no disagreement or argument in this article, but there is something at stake. The focus of the article is Apple's decision to invest in virtual technology and what the future will hold. This is what is at stake. The article lays out different directions in which Apple can proceed. Since Apple is such a large company, consumers and shareholders will be greatly impacted in the direction Apple chooses.
With the 2016 presidential race approaching Iowa, there is a lot of focus on the candidates and the actions they choose to make. This New York Times article reveals that 22 of the emails sent from Senator Clinton's unclassified server were tagged as "too classified" to be released to the public. This is important not only for her campaign's sake, but also her legal situation.
Hilary Clinton could not be closer to the center of this story. Every perspective has some kind of connection or focus on her. Whether it is her competition or her supporters, the article explains how Senator Clinton is directly influencing every situation. She is the one legally responsible and the one that will ultimately have to deal with the consequences.
Since the investigation of Senator Clinton's email controversy is happening in Washington D.C., the physical setting is technically there. However, this kind of national security issue, tied in with a presidential race, has a national platform. Anyone that is voting or cares about the presidential race, or our national security, would be interested in hearing this story. This seems to be the case with any controversial story that has a presidential candidate involved. Both sides must pay attention, either to support or defend the main character involved.
Like the polarized world of politics, there are two stubborn sides of this argument. The opposing side, non-Hilary supporters, tries to argue that Senator Clinton would be an irresponsible candidate. Sharing classified information on an unclassified and insecure server would put the U.S. in harms way. On the other hand, Hilary supporters, and Hilary herself, claim that the emails were not classified and that the whole controversy is being used as a political tool to bash the Senator.
For both sides the presidential candidacy is at stake. Voters have to pick one side. That decision will ultimately impact the presidential race in some way shape or form.
Apple Invests in Virtual Reality
As technology advances, businesses try to invest in the most promising developments. This is the case for virtual reality technology. Reaching platforms such as social media, movies, video games, and other media outlets, virtual reality will have many niches in future entertainment. This promise grabs the attention of any business that can afford to invest in it.
This article focuses on Apple and their decision to buy Flyby Media, an augmented reality start-up. While Apple seems to be the main character of this story, the article starts to widen its focus and talk about virtual reality in general. While mentioning other investing companies such as Facebook and Google, the article always comes back to Apple. While the first part of the article focuses on the actions Apple already made, the second half compares what other companies have done and what Apple could do.
There is not a specific setting for this story because the focus of the article is a product, virtual reality. There is never any location mentioned, as most of the article is hypothetical and speculation. The only action that can be tied to a specific location is the act of Apple buying Flyby Media. However, this detail has little relevance to the focus of the article.
There is no disagreement or argument in this article, but there is something at stake. The focus of the article is Apple's decision to invest in virtual technology and what the future will hold. This is what is at stake. The article lays out different directions in which Apple can proceed. Since Apple is such a large company, consumers and shareholders will be greatly impacted in the direction Apple chooses.
Sunday, January 24, 2016
Course Projects
- What are you most confused by or nervous about in regards to the four major projects?
The thing I am most nervous about is having to film or record myself. I am much more comfortable writing and organizing my thoughts on paper. I am nervous I am not going to be able to accurately convey what I am try to say in these genres.
- What are you most interested in or excited by in regards to the four major projects?
I am most excited for the freedom in the projects. It is much easier to do a project when it is interesting. I will have a lot more motivation to work on these projects than any other mandated topic.
- Based on your understanding of the major projects, what are the elements of this course that you have to plan ahead for? How will the coursework described in the four project assignment sheets challenge your time management skills this semester?
With these major major assignments, I think it is important to plan ahead for research, equipment needed, and how the genre will work with the specific project. These seem like the universal, nonnegotiable platforms that are necessary to do the project well.
- How has your past English coursework in high school or college prepared you for the challenges of this course? What skills will you bring into the course with you?
Taking AP English in high school prepared me for this class because in that course I became very comfortable with how I convey my voice in writing. I think this skill can be translated to other genres as well. I look forward to the challenge of trying to adapt this voice in order to adjust accordingly to the different genres. In our class we also had a very open environment in which everyone was encouraged to share their opinions. I can tell this class will be similar and I am excited to see all the interesting things people have to say.
- Do you have any questions about the four major projects that haven't been answered by the assignment sheets? What do you still want to know?
I think everything I need to know is already on the assignment sheets. With so much creative freedom, there are only a certain number of restrictions. The majority of the project will be decided by the person making it.
I looked at the blogs of Ryan Wolfe and Brady Thomas
Reflection: It is always good to hear similar worries about projects like these. It made me feel better that I am not the only one feeling nervous about some aspects of the projects, and as I read their worries, I could try to come up with solutions that could help. These projects are not to be taken lightly and I think it is good to acknowledge the possible problems that might occur.
I looked at the blogs of Ryan Wolfe and Brady Thomas
Reflection: It is always good to hear similar worries about projects like these. It made me feel better that I am not the only one feeling nervous about some aspects of the projects, and as I read their worries, I could try to come up with solutions that could help. These projects are not to be taken lightly and I think it is good to acknowledge the possible problems that might occur.
Investigating Genres
Podcasts
1. Podcasts seem to usually express some kind of unique view point. The topics can range from science based information to more personal opinions.
2. Podcasts can be found online. There is an actual place to listen and download them in an app for iOS but they can also be found on youtube or other secondary sharing websites. Some podcasters even have their own website where one could download episodes.
3. Some podcasts have a very focused audience and others vary the subject of discussion, allowing a wider range of listeners. This mainly depends on what kind of podcast exists. A podcast focused on science, or any other specific subject, will only target a certain amount of people that are interested in that subject. Other podcasts that are not as restricted in topics will have the opportunity to appeal to a larger group of people.
4. Podcasts are different from other genres because most of them are free flowing. There does not necessarily have to be a structured outline or plan for how the podcast will go. Podcasts allow the type of back and forth conversation similar to the radio, without having to be interrupted or without any restrictions content wise.
5. Podcasting is a unique genre because it allows unfiltered dialogue on a large platform. While videos can accomplish similar goals, podcasting can be very organic and create content as the episode progresses, while videos and other genre need some kind of plan or structure.
I responded to Joshua Martin Smith and Malik Bullock
Reflection: After reading the other posts, I realized that we will all make our own opinions about any given topic. Each view can incorporate different pieces of information. As I wrote my comments down I was able to relate to what the authors said but also add my own suggestions. This makes me want to try to not procrastinate so I can revisit my work multiple times, adding any new useful content as I update my point of view.
1. Podcasts seem to usually express some kind of unique view point. The topics can range from science based information to more personal opinions.
2. Podcasts can be found online. There is an actual place to listen and download them in an app for iOS but they can also be found on youtube or other secondary sharing websites. Some podcasters even have their own website where one could download episodes.
3. Some podcasts have a very focused audience and others vary the subject of discussion, allowing a wider range of listeners. This mainly depends on what kind of podcast exists. A podcast focused on science, or any other specific subject, will only target a certain amount of people that are interested in that subject. Other podcasts that are not as restricted in topics will have the opportunity to appeal to a larger group of people.
4. Podcasts are different from other genres because most of them are free flowing. There does not necessarily have to be a structured outline or plan for how the podcast will go. Podcasts allow the type of back and forth conversation similar to the radio, without having to be interrupted or without any restrictions content wise.
5. Podcasting is a unique genre because it allows unfiltered dialogue on a large platform. While videos can accomplish similar goals, podcasting can be very organic and create content as the episode progresses, while videos and other genre need some kind of plan or structure.
I responded to Joshua Martin Smith and Malik Bullock
Reflection: After reading the other posts, I realized that we will all make our own opinions about any given topic. Each view can incorporate different pieces of information. As I wrote my comments down I was able to relate to what the authors said but also add my own suggestions. This makes me want to try to not procrastinate so I can revisit my work multiple times, adding any new useful content as I update my point of view.
My Writing Process
1. My writing process includes more procrastination than anything. I would rather sit down and work on a piece for a long time than work on it in chunks. This allows me to get into the flow of whatever I am writing about. When I am able to get into this flow state it is easy for me to write continuously and then revise the finished product after.
2. Procrastinating is my dominant approach to writing. Since my writing process usually starts and ends in one sitting, I have to pick the right time to decide to sit down and work on it. This also leads to heavy revision. My writings start with a small plan or outline, a long, intensive period of writing, and a thorough revision afterwards.
3. My approach to writing is a risky one. Procrastination is never a good thing, adding unnecessary stress to assignments. However, I can write better when I have to write a whole piece at one time. While I would enjoy working on parts of the essay in advance, it is better for me to write an entire essay at once so I can connect my ideas effectively.
4. I think I could benefit from trying a heavy planner approach to writing. This would make the actual writing process a lot easier and I could still connect my ideas effectively.
This picture depicts my writing process because when I start writing there is nothing else for me to do than to focus on the writing. Also the danger of rock climbing correlates with the risk of procrastinating.
2. Procrastinating is my dominant approach to writing. Since my writing process usually starts and ends in one sitting, I have to pick the right time to decide to sit down and work on it. This also leads to heavy revision. My writings start with a small plan or outline, a long, intensive period of writing, and a thorough revision afterwards.
3. My approach to writing is a risky one. Procrastination is never a good thing, adding unnecessary stress to assignments. However, I can write better when I have to write a whole piece at one time. While I would enjoy working on parts of the essay in advance, it is better for me to write an entire essay at once so I can connect my ideas effectively.
 |
| Spencerlikestorun. "Rock Climbing" July 29, 2014 via pixabay. Public Domain. |
This picture depicts my writing process because when I start writing there is nothing else for me to do than to focus on the writing. Also the danger of rock climbing correlates with the risk of procrastinating.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)