Design 1: “Neuroscientist Grégoire Courtine was able to make a monkey walk again after a successful brain implant.”
Good: This gets across good information. It provides some specific information.
Bad: It doesn’t get to the point fast enough. If someone was reading this on twitter, they would probably probably scroll through, nothing catches the eye.
Design 2:”Paralyzed monkeys are able to walk after a successful brain implants by neuroscientist Grégoire Courtine”
Good: Drawn in from the beginning of the sentence.
Bad: This can get a little wordy and is not as effective of a tweet.
Design 3: “Paralyzed monkeys can walk once again due to successful brain implant”
Good: Eliminated the neuroscientists name, since all it does is prolong the tweet and people don’t know who he is.
Bad: Vocabulary is not as compelling
Design 4:”Brain implants allow paralyzed monkeys to walk again”
Good: Eliminates inactive words.
Bad: This isn’t super compelling, there is still not too much that draws in the reader.
Design 5: “First successful brain implant allows paralyzed monkeys to walk again”
Good: By saying “first successful” it makes the article more compelling by informing the readers that this is a first and that this is a big breakthrough-not just another piece of news.
In the article “Twitter Postings”, Mr. Nielsen continues to redesign his tweet a total of 5 times. Each revision, the tweet seemingly gets more simple and efficient. When tweeting, it is important that its content is short and to the point. When scrolling through twitter, people spend such little time looking at each individual one, that in order to make sure a tweet is effective, it must be short and concise. Along with that, a tweet must be very easily understandable with little amount of possible confusion.
In the second revision, he eliminates the beginning word “Announcing” creating a more efficient. This change did seem to create a much bigger impact of the tweet because obviously the tweet is announcing something, it doesn’t need to be stated. Another important change that was made was the adding of “(October)” and “(November)”. These specified to the people when the conferences would be. This addition is a great example of how tweets need to be specific. It is important for the readers of the tweets to feel like they are really being informed about something, rather than just being told information. By providing more specific details, it allows the tweet to be more informative.
Some very important parts of a tweet when asked from a target group was timeliness, and information that the reader expected from the tweeter. These factors are extremely important to the audience and just as these are important, there are some factors that could definitely ruin a tweet. Choice of username for example is a big one. For example, “the United States Department of Education’s Twitter ID was “usedgov,” which sounded to users like “used government” and was off-putting.”
Mr. Nielsen does for sure seem to follow his own guidelines. His tweets were short and sweet and to the point. As well, as being effective, they followed his guidelines properly.
In this illustration by Luke Pearson, the visual is the most important part to the storytelling. While there are speech bubbles through the graphic, the words by alone do not tell much of a story. The illustration provides the readers with about 95% of the story, while the words are more of a transition connecting everything together. The illustration is able to show the aging of the different characters such as the young boy, to the old man in the beginning. The visual is kind of the in-between of the text. The text will provide a bit of information such as the characters perspective, but then the visual goes on to elaborate the initial statement a bit further. The visual is also able to show the audience the characters facial expressions. Facial expressions are such a big social cue that we rely on a daily basis. In the on particular part of the illustration where the young girl grows into an older woman with a child, you can gradually see the smile fade as she gets older. This smile eventually turns into a frown in which she states “Come on you little brat. Yer going straight to your dads.” Without being able to see any of the transition before this, you would have only previously read “I will.” This makes absolute no sense when taken out of context. This form of reading is not strictly limited to reading. The illustration enhances the reading and makes it comprehendible.
The 9/11 Commission Report was very specific and had a lot of exact information. The graphic adaptation however had a more general outline of the whole situation. Although the graphic adaptation had less specific information, it did provide the audience with a better “idea” of what happened. By providing pictures and a visual aid, it did seem to allow for greater understanding. The report was also very unbiased. Although a terrible situation, the article remained a simple rundown of the situation. While providing a visual aid the graphic novel creates what seems to be a very violent image.
A graphic novel provides the audience with a much more emotional view of the situation. The graphic promotes a lot more emotion through pathos because of the imagery used. When hearing just straight up facts it can be a lot harder to picture the situation. When using quite graphic pictures that show how intense the situation is it forces the audience to see the situation as the author exactly wants them to see it. Not how the reader might interpret it.
9/11 was such a traumatic experience for the whole country. This event was something that affected so many people, but a vast majority of the country was not actually there to witness it. In fact, there we no actual survivors from the plane, so people can’t really imagine what exactly went down. By providing a graphic, people are able to connect and understand the situation fully.
In these two pieces of writing, the authors both establish ethos through their use of knowledge on the subject. They both begin their reports with a strong “historical” sort of fact. Forman with the mechanization of food production, and Pollan with the discussion of the descents of the Maya. They establish a sense that they really understand their topic through using other sources. Not only do they report hard facts, but in Forman’s report, he puts himself in the situation. When he brings up Grinnell, Iowa, he shows his experience through him being a resident there. With things like personal experience, it establishes a credibility that reenforces his thesis.
Both of these are definitely fall under the report genre. They are able to create report with logical information through a use of facts and personal experience to support their claim. Their papers as well, do not come across as biased, although obviously, their opinion causes a natural bias. I do really like the use of a bar graph in Forman’s report, because it further enhances his ethos. The use of a visual breaks up the report and provides the readers with a more helpful piece of information.
Both of Pollan and Forman’s reports establish a kind of “call to action”. Their arguments invoke a sense of urgency to change their way of food consumption, and how to percieve the current food production industry. These are both good examples for our “Mapping the Problem Essay” because thats our essential goal. To get others to care about an issue as much as we do.
Before reading Dirk’s essay, I would have defined genre as different categories of writing. These categories being things such as historical fiction, science fiction, young adult, etc… I never thought of genre as necessarily helpful. I have always thought of genre mostly of something that is just kind of there. If you are looking for a book, you man know what genre of book you want but that was mostly the extent of it.
Dirk essentially defines genre as a guideline for future writings. I would re-define genre as knowledge of similar situations that are focused by a writers purpose through their intended location.
I would say that genre is a recipe. When cooking, a lot of people follow a recipe, but will change the recipe bit by bit depending on their personal preferences. This is much like writing and genres. A certain genre might give someone a general knowledge of what their writing should entail, but also they will change it depending on the situation, purpose, and location.
Previously, I have often had many teachers who were very strict on plagiarism. My AP Language and Composition teacher once gave us a 20 minute lecture in rage because one of his students had plagiarized. Many other of my teachers though have had very strong opinions as well. Plagiarism is essentially taking another persons work and claiming it as your own. This is an awful thing because not only it is not a good representation of what you can do (as a student or in other capacities), but also it says to the person that you are plagiarizing that essentially, you do not respect them or value them.
The five types of plagiarism that Martin describes are…
- Word-for-word: this is when someone takes a piece of work and directly copies it and says it is their own.
- Paraphrasing Plagiarism: If someone paraphrases a piece of text, but they fail to rearrange the form of the text or don’t completely make it their own.
- Plagiarism of secondary sources: This occurs when a person references and cited original materials that they found from a secondary source, but does not cite the secondary source.
- Plagiarism of the form of a source: When someone uses the same structure of an argument without giving that source credit.
- Plagiarism of ideas: When someone uses an original thought of another person.
Martin claims that many students plagiarize because they are simply unaware that they are doing so. They may learn in high school or younger to cite improperly so when they enter college, they will accidentally plagiarize sources.
Institutionalized plagiarism also known as “ghostwriting” is often done by politicians, or people of high authority, or under harsh scrutiny. They will have someone write their speeches, books, or newspaper columns for them, and don’t straight up give the writer credit. However, competitive plagiarism is the taking of a persons ideas who are scholars on that topic.
In order to manage plagiarism properly, Martin suggests that in a self-managed society plagiarism would not be an issue. Ideally, in a self managed society with no social hierarchy, credit for ideas would not even matter. In this type of society, Martin claims that plagiarism might still exist however, but it wouldn’t be treated as a huge problem.