User:Isabella Pham/Digital rhetoric

Edits:

• "Digital rhetoric can also help strengthen a reader's connection to the text by allowing them to directly interact with and comment on it." (Citation: Clark, J. Elizabeth. “The Digital Imperative: Making the Case for a 21st-Century Pedagogy.” Computers and Composition, vol. 27, no. 1, 2010, pp. 27–35., doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2009.12.004.)
• "Casey Boyle, James Brown Jr., and Steph Ceraso's interpretation of this concept focuses more on the digital aspect. They claim that "the digital" is no longer just one of the many different tools that can be used to enhance traditional rhetoric, but an "ambient condition" that encompasses our everyday lives. In other words, as technology becomes more and more ubiquitous, the lines between traditional and digital rhetoric will start to blur. In addition, Boyle et. al emphasize the idea that technology and rhetoric can both influence and transform each other."
• "However, while computers may be one of the most prominent means of producing digital rhetoric, Sean Morey notes that many other devices, including smartphones, tablets, digital cameras, electronic pens, graphic design programs, presentation software, and more can be utilized for the same purpose."

Critical Literacy

According to Kathleen Tyner, a researcher and professor at the University of Texas, critical literacy is a skill that allows people to thoroughly and rationally analyze texts based on the overarching social contexts in which they were created. Due to the fact that fake news, propaganda, and misinformation can be spread quickly over the Internet, it is important to carefully evaluate all types of digital rhetoric. Some misleading content can even be circulated by autonomous agents. For example, a study conducted at the Indiana University in Bloomington used algorithms to assess 14 million Twitter messages containing statements about the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and election. Researchers found that, from May 2016 to March 2017, social bots were responsible for causing approximately 389,000 unsupported political claims to go viral.

Tagging

Digital rhetoric is often labelled using tags, which are keywords that readers can type into search engines in order to help them find, view, and share relevant texts and information. These tags can be found on blog posts, news articles, scholarly journals, and more. Tagging allows writers, orators, and scholars to organize their work and make it more accessible and understandable to readers.

Interactivity

In regards to digital rhetoric, interactivity can be defined as the ways in which readers connect to and communicate with digital texts. For example, readers have the ability to like, share, retweet/repost, comment on, and remix online content. These simple interactions allow writers, orators, and scholars to get a better idea of how their work is affecting their audience.

Notes:

• Lead: I feel like the current lead is fairly effective because it's short, sweet, and to the point.
• Sections: I might want to add a section under "Scope of influence" that explains how commercial branding ties into digital rhetoric. There was a section about that before, but it was removed because the information was not very relevant or reliable. However, one thing that could be an issue is that I am not sure if I will be able to find good sources about this specific aspect of my topic, since finding general info has already been a struggle for me.
• Information-->Existing section: I was thinking about adding to the "History" section.
• Balance: I feel like it's balanced for the most part.
• Neutrality: The "Politics" section also seems slightly biased, in my opinion.
• Specific planned actions:

Possible sources to look at:

"Recovering Delivery for Digital Rhetoric" by James E. Porter https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8755461509000632

"The Digital Imperative: Making a Case for a 21st-century Pedagogy" by J. Elizabeth Clark https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S8755461509000887

Article Evaluation Criteria:

• Is the article's content relevant to the topic? Are some areas under- or over-developed? Yes. Some things that could possibly be added are: a section elaborating on the digital rhetoric of "commercial branding" (online advertising), definitions of ethos/pathos/logos in the related concepts section, etc.
• Is it written neutrally? Somewhat, the section on politics might be slightly biased.
• Does each claim have a citation? Are the citations reliable? Yes.