Course Evaluation

This course has been filled with a variety of news stories, blog posts, and quirky side stories.  It's been nice to become more informed about news stories and actually see how different stories are spread across multiple sources.  I found the most interesting part of this course actually came when writing our last essay about following a news story across different media.  I followed how the overturning of Prop 8 became a big media story in February of 2012.  It was interesting to see how one paper close in California reported on it compared to how The New York Times reported on it and then to see the millions of different spin-offs of the issue.  You never really realize how much a story expands until you look at a variety of different sources. I hope to use my knowledge of connecting sources to get a broader view of the news spectrum and not take everything I see or read at face value.

The Wedding Aisle to Gay Marriage

Allison Proehl

Professor Eric Leake

Writing

Blog Following Essay

The Wedding Aisle to Gay Marriage

            Same-sex marriage has been a controversial issue since the stories of Adam and Eve were first written. Across the nation it has been one of the largest social issues that the National Court system has left for the states to decide. On February 7, 2012 the Appeals Court of California in a 2-1 verdict, made the ruling to overturn Proposition 8. From their ruling came a hurricane of TV reports, blogs, articles, and more than ever a full fledge media discussion about the recent ruling. When the ruling to overturn Prop 8 emerged at the beginning of February of this year, the legalities of same-sex marriage awoke fierce debate between supporters of same-sex couples and those in opposition of gay marriage. By analyzing the blogs and articles written about the Appeals Court’s decision to over turn Proposition 8 we can gain a better understanding about how the flow of information circulates and is discussed. This blogosphere of information also allows readers to track the effect this court case has on state and national law regarding same-sex marriage.

            The California’s Appeals Court’s controversial decision to overturn Proposition 8 started a media frenzy.  The press have written articles and blogs about the decision and the possibility of what will happen next regarding the legalities of same-sex marriage.  After the final 2-1 decision was announced major media stations began to respond to the outcome. Since the whole decision was based upon California law, it’s important to take a close look at Newspapers in California. The L.A. Times was one of the major papers that immediately put out an article regarding Prop 8.  While reading the article, it is apparent, first from the rainbow flag picture that dominates the page, the title, and then the word choice of the author Erwin Chemerinsky, although the article tries to be unbiased there is a definite support of gay marriage throughout it. Although there is a Pro-gay marriage voice to the article Chemerinsky does a good job at looking at the logistics of Prop 8.  Unlike most of the other articles written, he chose to write about how Prop 8 should never have been put on the ballot back in 2008. “The ban on marriage equality for gays and lesbians serves no legitimate government interest. Under this reasoning — though it was not the holding of the case — any law denying marriage equality would be unconstitutional” (Chemerinsky). This is a very refreshing view that differs from the articles that are written completely on the moral issue of gay marriage and not on the legal ones.  In the L.A. Times’ article there is also a strong presence of practicality. Statistics that supporters of Prop 8 commonly use as grounds to deny gays and lesbians the right to marry are disproved. He writes about how marriage is designed to encourage procreation, yet heterosexual couples who either are enable or unwilling to procreate are still allowed to marry and gays and lesbians are not.  I really liked how practical his article was and how it took a majority of the arguments used by supporters of Prop 8 and put them to rest.  From this article the information regarding the Appeal Court’s decision is spread to all readers of the L.A. Times, as well as it gives a close up view of the court proceedings that are happening in the L.A. Times’ home state of California.

One of the other significant networks that responded to the recent ruling was the newspaper, The New York Times. As a result of the high sensitivity and controversy over same-sex marriage it was apparent that the Times wanted to report on the issue without bias. On February 7, 2012 the Times reported on the case, reporting the Appeals Court’s decision to overturn Prop 8. Their article gave a general history of the different court cases that same-sex marriage has battled and gave equal space for those in favor of gay marriage as well as those against it. The main focus of the article was not only to report on this extremely controversial issue but also to draw attention to the future of gay marriage at a national level. “Both sides in the case made clear that they intended to take the case before the Supreme Court in hopes of prompting it to settle once and for all an issue that has been fought out in courts, legislatures and ballot boxes since at least a 1971 case” (Nagourney). With the publication of this article regarding gay marriage (as well as 4 others on the same topic) the issues was spread to millions of readers.  On the NY Times’ article ‘Court Strikes Down Ban on Gay Marriage in California,’ over 1200 comments were posted regarding the subject matter thus expanding the conversation surrounding the decision to overturn Proposition 8.  In Nagourney’s article about gay marriage he links to the American Foundation for Equal Rights. The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER) became the sole backer for the Perry v. Brown case which lead to the overturning of Prop 8.  Thus the blogosphere not only includes the Appellate Court’s decision but also the L.A. and New York Times’ articles, and AFER’s response to the verdict.

After the release of California’s Appeals Court’s decision to overturn Proposition 8 and the New York Times’ article about the court’s decision, the articles regarding the legality and right for gays to marry expanded to the American Foundation for Equal Rights’ website.  From the NY Times’ link to the AFER website, there is an article regarding the organization’s joy in the trial’s outcome as well as multiple reasons why they believed that Prop 8 should be overturned.  AFER Board President Chad Griffin was reported saying, “Every American, regardless of race, ethnicity, or sexual orientation, deserves the same dignity and respect, the same freedom to love and to marry and to build a family” (U.S. Court of Appeals). This article along with the AFER websites is clearly in support of not only gay marriage but also fundamental rights that are written in the U.S. Constitution that gays have been denied.  I think they do a good job in their article about ‘furthering’ the conversation as Harris puts it. They not only acknowledge that Prop 8 was overturned but they point out sections in the Constitution that gays and lesbians are being denied. AFER expands the conversation from one Proposition against gay marriage and extends it to include basic human rights that the law has ignored. They take notice of ‘human dignity’ regardless of race, sexual orientation, or ethnicity and recognize that gays and lesbians are being denied both the right to marry and the right to be treated with equal dignity and respect under the law. After the release of the Ninth Districts decision and the publication of the article ‘U.S. Court of Appeals Uphold Federal District Court Ruling that Proposition 8 is Unconstitutional’ on its website the blogosphere is once again expanded to include more than 100,000 followers of AFER along with the thousands that found the original article on the New York Times’ website. 

In order to stay unbiased in his article regarding gay marriage, New York Times’ writer Adam Nagourney not only links to the American Foundation for Equal Rights but also to Protect Marriage.com. The Protect Marriage website expands the discussion about the Ninth Districts ruling on gay marriage to include those who support Proposition 8 and thus are against gay marriage. As a result of the Appeals Court ruling against Prop 8, it is appropriate that Protect Marriage’s main focus in their article is to counter the Court’s decision. Their main goal is to preserve the term ‘marriage’ for the union of a man and a woman and they use this notion in furthering their argument against those that support gay marriage. In their article they do not just disagree with the Court’s decision they “push beyond mere disagreement” (Harris 56).  The article opens up new lines of inquiry that the New York Times and American foundation for Equal Rights does not consider. They bring up the previous decision as decided by the voters of California back in 2008 and try to add that to their argument against gay marriage. “The panel’s ruling mischaracterized the purpose of marriage, failed to faithfully and fairly interpret the Constitution, and disregarded every relevant appellate and Supreme Court precedent in American history” (Hass).  Those in favor of Prop 8 are attempting to further their campaign by appealing to all of the Ninth District’s Judges and get the public’s support behind them by reaching out to their 100,000 followers.  Once again the blogosphere has increased from the first release of the CA Appeals Court’s decision, then from the L.A. and New York Times’ article summarizing the decision, and then finally it is expanded to both sides of the controversy. Readers of the L.A. and NY Times, American Foundation for Equal Rights, and Protect Marriage are all included in the blogosphere and thus the flow of information that was all spun from the result of the overturning of Proposition 8.

             As a consequence of California’s Appeals Court’s Decision to overturn Proposition 8, a national discussion regarding gay marriage was seen across the news and Internet.  The Court’s judgment sparked articles by major news publishers like the L.A. and New York Times, which has thousands of readers commenting on the article.  The opinions of both those in favor of gay marriage and those against it were both linked in the New York Times’ article and thus expanded the flow of information from a few thousand readers of the Times to millions of readers from multiple websites and blogs. By tracing the flow of how the overturning of Proposition 8 is being interpreted by multiple groups we are better able to understand the blogosphere’s affect on the nation.

Works Cited:

Chemerinsky, Erwin. "Prop. 8 Ruling: The Legal Path Ahead." Los Angeles Times.

     N.p., 8 Feb. 2012. Web. 5 Mar. 2012. <http://www.latimes.com/news/

     opinion/commentary/

     la-oe-chemerinsky-proposition-8-ruling-20120208,0,5128797.story>.

Harris, Joseph. Rewriting. Logan, Utah: Utah State UP, 2006. Print.

Hass, Carla. Official Proponents Appeal Prop 8 Decision to Entire 9th Circuit.

     Protect Marriage, 21 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012.

     http://www.protectmarriage.com/blog/

Nagourney, Adam. "Court Strikes Down Ban on Gay Marriage in California." The New

     York Times. N.p., 10 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012.

     <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/us/

     marriage-ban-violates-constitution-court-rules.html?scp=7&sq=prop%208%20overturne

     d&st=cse>.

"U.S. Court of Appeals Upholds Federal District Court Ruling That Proposition 8

     Is Unconstitutional." American Foundation for Equal Rights. N.p., 8 Feb.

     2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.afer.org/news/

     u-s-court-of-appeals-upholds-federal-district-court-ruling-that-proposition-8-is-

     unconstitutional/>.

Extra Gay Marriage History in California (not part of the essay, just informative): In 2000 California enacted Prop 22, which stated that only the marriage between a man and a woman would be recognize in the state of California. This was closely followed by The Domestic Partnership Act in 2003 which gave the general benefits that those in opposite-sex marriages received to same-sex civil unions.  However civil union did not get the full benefits of opposite-sex couples, thus in 2004 Prop 22 was challenged and eventually invalidated.  Thus the opposing party of gay marriage enacted Prop 8. Prop 8 stated it did not recognize same-sex marriages in the state of California and eventually passed in California with a 52.3% approval.  As a small stipulation the court decided that the some 18,000 plus same-sex marriages that were preformed in California would not be nullified.  However same-sex couples were denied the right to the title of “marriage” thus in 2009, same-sex couples K. Perry and S. Stier and P. Katami and J. Zarrillo filed suit to get Prop 8 overturned. In August of 2010 U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn R. Walker overturned Prop 8. After considering Walker’s injunction a the Appeals Court decided that Proposition 8 was unconstitutional under the Due Process Clause as well as it violated the Equal Protection Clause. On February 7,2012 the Appeals Court made the final decision to overturn Proposition 8.

The New York Times...Revised

I chose to revise this post a bit because I felt like I didn’t really add anything to the conversation about why the New York Times is such a credible source of information. In this post I attempted to accurately talk about why the NY Times is a good source of news as well as add multiple statistics to my post to add accuracy.

Informative.  That’s the first thing that comes to mind—mostly because I really didn’t read the newspaper very often prior to taking this specific writing course.  The New York Times has been known to be a credible source of news.  However it has also been known to have a strong liberal bias. The New York Times has been a strong news present since 1851 and is one of the top news cites looked at in the U.S. It is ranked 31^st in the United States of top sites visited according to ‘Alexa-The Web Information Company.’ I’ve found that the NY Times has a pretty large audience—currently 447,327 sites have the NY times linked to their website.  Originally I was skeptical at the power the NY Times had on the American people, but I’ve found that a lot of people agree the NY Times is a very credible news source and one of the top sources visited. It’s estimated that about 16,355,042 Unique Visitors (individuals who visit the site at least once a month according to complete.com) visit the NY Times at least once a month.  And that statistic doesn’t even count the number of people that look at the NY Times multiple times a month or the people who read the hard copy.

 However I do not read the NY Times the traditional way.  I read it on NYTimes.com or on the app on my phone.  Although they report the same headlines, the way they are displayed couldn’t be more different.  A newspaper has only what is printed and usually on the front cover there is a huge photo to catch readers eyes.  On their website there are short blurbs on the main headlines and then click-able links that lead to the entire article as well as other links that are similar to the article’s topic.  Links to other websites have major appeal because they allow readers to continue reading more news. 

Trying to Take an Approach

            I found Harris’s definition of “Taking an Approach” to be a bit muddled and hard to follow.  I felt like in this chapter he was a bit scatterbrained about what taking an approach really meant.  I did draw from the chapter that he kind of saw it as not rewriting passages or ideas from a text but another writer’s mode or style of working.  I think he is suggesting that to be a proficient writer you can’t just rely on redoing what other writers have done, but you can use other writer’s style of writing. I think a good example of this can be found in artist movements like Renaissance, Baroque, Romanticism, Realism, Impressionism, Cubism, Expressionism, and Modernism…etc.  Pablo Picasso is well known for his abstract cubism paintings that sparked a new way to paint.  The other painters of that era didn’t just recreate one of Picasso’s paintings; instead they reinvented it and made it their own. This is also a good place I think Harris’s idea of “Reflexivity” fits in.  Like for many painters and writers, there is a sense of ‘self’ in whatever they are creating.  Although big websites like the New York Times and Business Insider can’t really reflect in their news articles, I do think they are reflective in what quotes they choose to print in their articles.  In that way the writer is making the news story his or her own.  From the style of the NY Times you can tell the writers are sticking to the style of the other writers of the Times, but they are also adding their own spin on topics.  I think this is a semi accurate example of how the NY Times is “Taking an Approach.”

The Daily Show and Countering

Harris’s definition of countering is “bringing a different set of interests to bear upon a subject, look to notice what others have not.  Your aim is not to refute what has been said before, to bring the discussion to an end, but to respond to prior views in ways that move the conversation in new directions” (56).  Although The Daily Show isn’t a blog I think it acts rather closely to one and does an excellent job of ‘countering’.  I like following/watching Jon Stewart for one the entertainment, but also because he talks about a lot about issues that newspapers cover, yet his show is more appealing and easier to understand way.  Stewart’s recent show on February 15, 2012 does a nice job in not only furthering the conversation on insider trading but also bringing a different set of interests to the conversation.  Originally 60 Minutes brings up how although for regular Americans can be prosecuted for using insider trading information in order to buy/sell stocks it is still legal for congress men and women to use their inside information in order to either help Hedge funds or to buy their own stocks.  The reason I think The Daily Show does a good job in countering is because he questions Congress when they say they want to pass a bill that hold Congress accountable like every other American.  I think Stewart furthers the conversation by first taking what 60 minutes has to say as well as countering Congress by sarcastically stating, “Oh right, it’s ridiculous to expect that Congress should be held under the same rules as regular Americans.”  I think this doesn’t just stop the conversation like most arguments do—it furthers the conversation by looking at another angle.  Stewart constantly tries to look at news stories from different angles without just blatantly putting down the opposing argument.

RE: RE: RE: Forwarding...

            Right from the beginning of Harris’s ‘Forwarding’ chapter I like his general concept of adding to a conversation.  I never really realized it but the reason you talk to other people is to add knowledge or wisdom to the discussion.  Of course there are times where the sole goal of making a comment is to end a conversation—but for the most part Harris says it is to push the conversation forward, “to say something new, something that seem to call for further talk and writing” (35-36).  That really is the perfect way to describe blogs.  The blog I’ve been following—Business Insider is made for people to add to the conversation, maybe not in the traditional sense but there is still that response to forward the conversation.  While browsing through Business Insider’s website you can find multiple ways to ‘forward’ the conversation.  Harris describes forwarding by using email as an example, “In the email program I use, these two functions are illustrated by opposing arrows: reply (ß) send your comment back to the sender; forward (à) directs them outward to other readers.  And these forwards can themselves be forwarded, to sometimes unexpected sites and publics—as anyone who has ever written an email post that seemed to take on a life of its own, found its way to unintended readers, can testify” (37).  Even I can testify to this type of treatment of my writing, aka Facebook.  There are tons of times where something posted on Facebook gets commented on and then reposted and added to and revised.  The same happens with Business Insider’s website, as far as I can tell the articles don’t get revised but they do get commented on often reposted on other websites.  I think this is exactly what Harris is referring to—in someway contributing to the conversation.  Recently I’ve been reading some of the comments posted on the main articles on BI and there are some very interesting comments that actually add to the conversation.  However on the other hand there are comments such as, “@BI all over the plase: Or in other words...The Cancer otherwise called OBAMA”  Or sarcastic rhetorical comments that really have no place in the conversation. That is one of Harris’s worries about forwarding, “In forwarding text, you begin to shift the focus of your readers away from what its author has to say and toward your own project” (38).  Honestly that really is an increasing problem—there often becomes a lot of opinion thrown into the conversation and thus it is altered.  Now in some aspect I’m sure that shifting the conversation can be beneficial, but I’m not entirely convinced that forwarding is all good.

Sharing the NYTimes

            Like any big company that’s trying to compete in today’s economy, it is vital to have a website that provides not only information about your company but also links to things that are relevant.  Originally The New York Times refused to create a NYTimes website—but as the times changed it became apparent that the only way to keep their business afloat was to make a website that projected their news stories.  The NYTimes does a good job in laying out their site basically the same as they do in their newspaper, the only real distinct difference is the links that each story have attached to it.  Under the main headlines and short blurbs about the article and then a link to the article as well other links about the story.  This is a good representation of a press-sphere—The NYTimes no longer is just reporting for our benefit.  They are reporting for us to not only read but to respond to.  Any article on the NYTimes website has links to Facebook, Twitter, Linkdin, as well as a way to email the article and a way to comment on the article.  Similar to what Jeff Jarvis wrote about creating a circular flow of news, is what the NYTimes has done. 

            Recently I’ve been following the website Business Insider—which really embodies the press-sphere.  On their homepage (unlike the NYT) readers can immediately long in through Facebook or Twitter in order to share articles.  Their website allows users to signup for emails and alerts and of course comment on the many articles they have posted.  On both the NYTimes website and on Business Insider there is audience participation.  Commenting, sharing, and linking to other websites creates a press-sphere that is focused around the reader; it’s a cycle of being informed and then sharing that information.

A Circular View of Information

The way we get information and news has completely changed.  According to Jeff Jarvis we no longer rely solely on the press to give us our daily dose of news.  The world has been changing along with the sources from which we receive information.  A Press-sphere is made up of not only the press (like in the old days) but it is also made up of companies, sources, data, government, archives, witnesses, and observers.  According to Jarvis a press-sphere calls for links to other sources in order to satisfy our need for news and information.  I completely agree with this way of understanding how the public gets their information.  No longer do we rely solely on what the press has to say.  There are a variety of websites that report on different news stories and that link up to site after site in order to expand the story. 

            I think the most complicated thing about Jarvis’ diagrams was the me-sphere.  I found it unusual to have a round about sort of information wheel.  He says that “news comes in and stories go out — text and photos come in and paper goes out.” Basically it is a whole circle of information, which is understandable since information flows so rapidly in our generation.  I was just mystified by the idea of a circular flow of information that is based around myself.  The flow of information doesn’t stop with one publication—the information gets shared, a video is made and posted on Facebook, which in turn gets kicked into blogs and talked about and shared until something else is produced.  It’s a crazy network of information that constantly overlaps and is intertwined.

Business Insider Close Up

The well know Business Insider website covers a variety of topics--ranging from Tech, Finance, Entertainment, sports, to Life.  There is a good amount of coverage on major news stories all categorized by their specific topic.  There is a very obvious business driven mindset that can be seen in most of the articles.  Even under topics like ‘Sports’ and ‘Entertainment’ it is clear that the writers of Business Insider want to make sure that all their articles in some way lead back to either the economy or something related to money.  Basically any article they write about either has a direct business mindset or is focused on how it affects your life.   

Business Insider

I decided to follow Business Insider because it has information that a majority of the time I don't get to read.  I think business insider is a well organized site and I think as I grown older it's smart to have a reasonable understanding of American Business practices as well as other countries.

The Evolution of Readers and Writers

Allison Proehl

Professor Leake

WRIT

My target audience is to an older generation that doubts the credibility of the current generation.  Basically it’s a plea/argument to get men and women to understand that my generation is not, as perceived, the dumbest generation.  Today’s generation has adapted to the technologies of this decade and I’m attempting to convince the reader and older men and women that we should not be measured against what other decades considered to be ‘literate’.

The world is changing and the way we read and write about that world is part of that transformation.  Technology has created an entire generation of readers and writers who generate anywhere from short updates about his or her day to lengthy essays about current events.  Students are furthering their education—maybe not in the traditional style but according to Sylvia Scribner, Clive Thompson, and Andrew Sullivan technology has not only changed what we are reading as a generation but they also note it is adding to the amount that society is writing.   By embracing the information that is readily available, today’s generation is furthering their reading and writing skills like never before.

The free flow of information that is available on the Internet has revolutionized the way society interprets and responds to information.  Because of the modernization of technology and thus the flow of information, it would be assumed that the procedure for measuring literacy should be updated to fit society.  However many critics argue that the way for measuring literacy should be the same as it was back in the 1900’s.  Literacy is defined as the quality or state of being literate, especially the ability to read or write with synonyms for the word listed as learning and culture (CMS).  I bring up the dictionary definition of ‘literacy’ in order to draw attention to the ‘quality’ and ‘state’ of being literate as well as a synonym for it as defined as ‘culture’.  Literacy is defined by the culture it is surrounded by—our current society is not the same as the one in 1920.  The way we share information cannot accurately be compared to any other generation and thus it cannot be fairly measured.  “Definitions of literacy shape our perceptions of individuals who fall on either side of the standard (what a ‘literate’ or ‘nonliterate’ is like) and thus in a deep way affect both the substance and the style of educational programs” (Scribner 6).  We are defined by how society perceives us—however accurate or inaccurate that may be.  If today’s generation is the be measured up to the old standard of literacy then the millions of Facebook posts, Twitter updates, and blog readings most likely would not be considered to be a beneficial to a person’s literacy.  However when considering today’s generation you should also consider the type of media and texts men and women are constantly surrounded by.  Society may no longer be reading “War and Peace” but society is reading millions of smaller pieces every second via the Internet.  The standard for measuring literacy should be altered to today’s generation and how men and women read and write with modern technology.  By taking into account the current means that information is available by, it can be seen that today’s generation is increasing men and women’s reading and writing output tremendously.

Society has changed—the technology created in the last 10 years alone, has revolutionized how men and women read and write.  Facebook updates, Twitter posts, and blogs have virtually replaced handwritten letters and newspapers, and the circulation of information is only a click away.  The current generation constantly circulates information and incessantly is responding to what is going on.  “The first thing she (Andrea Lunsford) found is that young people today write far more than any generation before them. That's because so much socializing takes place online, and it almost always involves text” (Thompson 1).  It is almost impossible that anyone in today’s generation isn’t swept away by some type of social media.  Consequently it is very rare that individuals in society can avoid reading or writing something on some type of website.  It is well know that Facebook alone has over 800 million users who on average spend 700 million minutes per month on Facebook (Facebook Statistics).  And that’s only looking at Facebook.  With outstanding numbers like that for one site, it can be assumed that other sites like Twitter, Blog Spot, Wikipedia, Google, and YouTube hold millions of readers and writers as well.  Today’s generation is not taking the Internet for granted, they have transformed into a society that uses the Internet to read and write in a revolutionary way.  From the Internet comes instant publication that wasn’t possible a decade ago.  Those short Twitter blurbs and Facebook wall posts are instantly globalized and are available to anyone with access to the Internet.  Because of this instant publishing Internet users are swayed more and more to continuously update the world on all his or her doings.  “This form of instant and global self-publishing, made possible by technology widely available only for the past decade or so, allows for no retroactive editing (apart from fixing minor typos or small glitches) and removes from the act of writing any considered or lengthy review. It is the spontaneous expression of instant thought” (Sullivan 1).  This spontaneous expression has led to the increase in writing as discussed by Sullivan.  Society is allowed the opportunity to express their immediate feelings to a situation and have it be available to other readers within seconds.  In the past, information was ‘slow’ and edited—there was no candidness to newspaper articles or news reports.  Internet posts, like blogging are instant and without any real hesitation.  “No columnist or reporter or novelist will have his minute shifts or constant small contradictions exposed as mercilessly as a blogger’s are. A columnist can ignore or duck a subject less noticeably than a blogger committing thoughts to pixels several times a day. A reporter can wait—must wait—until every source has confirmed. A novelist can spend months or years before committing words to the world. For bloggers, the deadline is always now” (Sullivan 2).  The same can be said for Facebook posts, blogs, and Twitter updates—there is no delay period for any of these types of media outputs.  That is what draws the user in—instant gratification.  From the combination of readily available information, social media websites, and instant gratification today’s generation is drawn in and has continued to read and write incomparable to any prior generation. 

Reading and writing as it once was known has changed forever.  Today’s generation is built on a platform of social media websites, endless information, and a desire to post every detail of our lives.  Literacy has changed, from its definition, to the way it is measured, to how society currently uses it.  However you look at it, it is impossible to ignore the fact that society is reading and writing at a rate that has never been seen before.  With the development of newer technologies comes the evolution of readers and writers everywhere.

                                                       Works Cited

Chicago Manual Style (CMS):

literacy. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged. Random House, Inc.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/literacy (accessed: January 30, 2012).

Facebook Statistics. N.p., n.d. Web. 1 Feb. 2012. <https://www.facebook.com/‌press/‌info.php?statistics>.

Scribner, Sylvia. “Literacy in Three Metaphors.” American Journal of Education 93 (1984): 6-21. PDF file.

Sullivan, Andrew. “Why I Blog.” The Atlantic. N.p., 18 Nov. 2008. Web. 7 Feb. 2012. <http://www.theatlantic.com/‌doc/‌200811/‌andrew-sullivan-why-i-blog>.

Thompson, Clive. “On New Literacy.” Wired. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Feb. 2012. <http://www.wired.com/‌techbiz/‌people/‌magazine/‌17-09/‌st_thompson>.

Ladies and Gentlemen, The New York Times...

Informative.  That’s the first thing that comes to mind—mostly because I really didn’t read the newspaper very often prior to taking this specific writing course.  The New York Times has been known to be a credible source of news, and they do a very nice job of covering main headlines and quite a few smaller stories as well.  However I do not read the NY Times the traditional way.  I read it on NYTimes.com or on the app on my phone.  Although they report the same headlines, the way they are displayed couldn’t be more different.  A newspaper has only what is printed and usually on the front cover there is a huge photo to catch readers eyes.  On their website there are short blurbs on the main headlines and then click-able links that lead to the entire article as well as other links that are similar to the article’s topic.  Links to other websites have major appeal because they allow readers to continue reading more news. 

            Major stories that have stood out to me are anything on the Primaries, the sinking of the Titanic part II (just kidding), most recently the Superbowl, as well as the huge debate over SOPA and PIPA.  I think the NY Times has done a pretty accurate job in covering major stories although I’m sure I have missed many local stories and other smaller but still news worthy stories.   By even just skimming the NY Times I am able to educate myself that much more and thus improve my writing because of what I am reading as well the way it is written.   

News From All Angles

Despite all the sources that news is available on, after looking at my classmate’s blogs the one source that was predominantly used was the Internet.  Like myself, my class found that news came at a much quicker pace when it was from the Internet.  It was increasingly apparent that sources like the radio and newspaper are becoming an obsolete source of news.  On occasion people read the newspaper, but our generation is no longer picking up a copy of the local paper and reading it at breakfast like our parents do.   Currently we are getting our information from notifications on our phones or from what we over read on Facebook.  It seems to me that we are solely relying on the Internet for news.  (Which is troublesome if we were to ever lose Internet access/service.)  I think Sullivan would agree that we rely on the Internet for quick news.  His blogs show that they report news (although most likely bias news) however it is news nonetheless.  Blogs report on the ongoing of every topic under the sun.  There are blogs devoted to Presidential Elections, which can provide up to date and accurate information on candidates.  That’s one of the things I like about blogs and getting my information from the Internet—you can read as little or as much as you want on the Internet.  On other sources of news like radio and television you aren’t really able to skip around to different news stories.  All in all I think it’s more important that people are reading or listening to the news, rather than where they get their news.

No More 'Fire Side Chats'

With all the available resources available it is increasingly easy to find news stories.  However it is not as easy (due to laziness) to look at news stories.  Now one of the main reasons I read about the news is because Yahoo is my homepage when I open an internet browser.  Now before there is any bashing on Yahoo, I like how their website is setup because there are about 16 news stories ranging from fashion to weather and I can quickly scroll over one and find out the main jist of a story.  If something really catches my eye I’ll click the link and read the article (or most of it).   The second way I get my news is notifications that get ‘pushed’ from my New York Times and CNN apps on my iphone.  Push notifications are also extremely useful, because they notify me about a main news story in one sentence, and from there I can choose to go to the main article or not.  Even if I’m not reading the entire article I still am able to find out about what is going on in the election or what big companies are doing.  Now although occasionally I do pick up a news paper or catch a glimpse of a news story on the TV, I usually don’t use either of these source to get my news.  As for radio since I’m big into music and don’t have a car in Denver I almost never listen to news stories via radio.  It’s strange how close to 70 years ago the radio was patented and became one of the biggest inventions used world wide.  I mean people were obsessed with the radio—they got to listen to FDR’s ‘fire side chats.’  The radio used to be such a source of news and now the only real radio station that I can think of to have any real impact anymore is NPR.  The world is changing—we no longer rely on radio or newspapers for news, it’s all about quick short stories on the Internet.

How I See It

The world is changing and the way we read and write about that world is part of the transformation.  Technology has created an entire generation of readers and writers who generate anywhere from short updates about his or her day to lengthy essays about current events.  Students are furthering their education—maybe not in the traditional style but according to Sylvia Scribner, Clive Thompson, and Andrew Sullivan technology has not only changed what we are reading as a generation but they also note it is adding to the amount that society is writing.   By embracing the information that is readily available, today’s generation is furthering their reading and writing skills like never before.

The free flow of information that is available on the Internet has revolutionized the way society interprets and responds to information.  From this revolution of technology and thus the flow of information, it would be assumed that the procedure for measuring literacy should be updated to fit society.  However many critics argue that the way for measuring literacy should be the same as it was back in the 1900’s.  Literacy is defined as the quality or state of being literate, especially the ability to read or write with synonyms for the word listed as learning and culture (CMS).  I bring up the dictionary definition of ‘literacy’ in order to draw attention to the ‘quality’ and ‘state’ of being literate as well as a synonym for it as defined as ‘culture’.  Literacy is defined by the culture it is surrounded by—our current society is not the same as the one in 1920.  The way we share information can’t even be compared to any other generation and thus it can’t fairly be measured.  “ Definitions of literacy shape our perceptions of individuals who fall on either side of the standard (what a ‘literate’ or ‘nonliterate’ is like) and thus in a deep way affect both the substance and the style of educational programs” (Scribner 6).  We are defined by how society perceives us—however accurate or inaccurate that may be.  If today’s generation is the be measured up to the old standard of literacy then the millions of Facebook posts, Twitter updates, and blog readings most likely would not be considered to be a beneficial to a person’s literacy.  However when considering today’s generation you should also consider the type of media and texts they are constantly surrounded by.  Society may no longer be reading “War and Peace” but society is reading millions of small things every second on the Internet.  The standard for measuring literacy should be altered to today’s generation and how they read and write with the current means of technology.  By taking into account the current means that information is available by, it can be seen that today’s generation is increasing their reading and writing output tremendously.

Society has changed—the technology created in the last 10 years alone, has revolutionized how men and women read and write.  Facebook updates, Twitter posts, and blogs have virtually replaced handwritten letters and newspapers, and the circulation of information is only a click away.  The current generation constantly circulates information and incessantly is responding to what is going on.  “The first thing she (Andrea Lunsford) found is that young people today write far more than any generation before them. That's because so much socializing takes place online, and it almost always involves text” (Thompson 1).  It is almost impossible that anyone in today’s generation isn’t swept away by some type of social media, thus it is very rare that individuals in society can avoid reading or writing something on some type of website.  It is well know that Facebook alone has 800 million users who on average spend 700 million minutes per month on Facebook (Facebook Statistics).  And that’s only Facebook.  With outstanding numbers like that for one site, it can be assumed that other sites like Twitter, Blog Spot, Wikipedia, Google, and YouTube hold millions of readers and writers as well.  Today’s generation is not taking the Internet for granted, they have transformed into a society that uses the Internet to read and write, in a way that has never been seen before.  From the Internet comes instant publication that wasn’t possible a decade ago.  Those short Twitter blurbs and Facebook wall posts are instantly globalized and are available to anyone with access to the Internet.  Because of this instant publishing Internet users are swayed more and more to continuously update the world on all their doings.  “This form of instant and global self-publishing, made possible by technology widely available only for the past decade or so, allows for no retroactive editing (apart from fixing minor typos or small glitches) and removes from the act of writing any considered or lengthy review. It is the spontaneous expression of instant thought” (Sullivan 1).  This spontaneous expression has led to the increase in writing as discussed by Sullivan.  Society is allowed the opportunity to express their immediate feelings to a situation and have it be available to other readers within seconds.  In the past, information was ‘slow’ and edited—there was no candidness to newspaper articles or news reports.  Internet posts, like blogging are instant and without any real hesitation.  “No columnist or reporter or novelist will have his minute shifts or constant small contradictions exposed as mercilessly as a blogger’s are. A columnist can ignore or duck a subject less noticeably than a blogger committing thoughts to pixels several times a day. A reporter can wait—must wait—until every source has confirmed. A novelist can spend months or years before committing words to the world. For bloggers, the deadline is always now” (Sullivan 2).  The same can be said for Facebook posts, blogs, and Twitter updates—there is no delay period for any of these types of media outputs.  That is what draws the user in—instant gratification.  From the combination of readily available information, social media websites, and instant gratification today’s generation is drawn in and has continued to read and write incomparable to any prior generation.  

Reading and writing as it once was known has changed forever.  Today’s generation is built on a platform of social media websites, endless information, and a desire to post every detail of our lives.  Literacy has changed—from the definition to the way it is measured to how society currently uses it.  However you look at it, it is impossible to ignore the fact that society is reading and writing at a rate that has never been seen before.

A Ending Thought, for now...

Blogging has been more interesting than I originally gave it credit for.  There is a lot of honest and well thought out posts from multiple students.  I was skeptical at first at what I’d learn from blogging to pieces by some writer I truly don’t care about—but then came the topics.  Google is Making Us Stupid, America the Illiterate, Literacy in Metaphors, and New Literacy.  I by far liked being able to candidly say whatever the hell I wanted about all of these readings, and honestly I didn’t really care if anyone else agreed with my arguments or not, but it was nice to be able to place them somewhere.  All of the sources got some kind of rise, or excitement out of me that I wasn’t aware I’d feel when starting this project.  It’s amazing not only what you learn about yourself but also what you learn from other’s opinions.

I’ve learned to look at blogging as becoming a credible source of writing, although I’m not 100% convinced I do think it holds substantial merit.  Same with how I few literacy and illiteracy in general, I realized neither are cut and dry.  They are both complicated and need to be looked at from multiple angles.  My web habits haven’t changed substantially, other than creating this blog and trying to balance how long I’m on Facebook with how long I read the news for.  I think the biggest change actually came about early on when thinking about the type of writing I did—and thus the realization that very few things were handwritten, thus I started a journal along side with writing these blog posts.  Of course my journal is more superficial, but it’s nice to also write about the events that happen in the news.  All in all its been a nice change and a cool way of writing about important topics in a free form way

Literacy in a New Art Form

It’s fascinating to me how Carr and Hodges are so willing to say how illiterate our country is but they never once give a definition of illiteracy.  How can you prove some ’40 million’ people (as stated in Hodge’s essay) are illiterate? With one huge test?  In Scribner’s article he brings up the fact that literacy have been attempted to be defined over and over again and is still inconclusive.  Thus he makes the argument that maybe, “Most efforts at definitional determination are based on a conception of literacy as an attribute of individuals; they aim to describe constituents of literacy in terms of individual ability.” This brings up the real possibility that literacy may be a social achievement rather than an individual one.  This social idea of literacy can be seen in Thompson’s writing as well.  Instead of condoning the countless hours of Facebook posts and tweets, Thompson quotes Professor Andrea Lunsford with saying, “The first thing she found is that young people today write far more than any generation before them. That's because so much socializing takes place online, and it almost always involves text.”  Now this is a very unique idea—our little blurbs about our lives and the comments we leave on a friend’s picture may actually be of some type of merit.  We write without even thinking about it because it is a social norm to have a Facebook, twitter, or some type of social networking site in your possession.  Which brings me to what Scribner refers to as Literacy as an adaptation.  It’s obvious in daily life how much we need to be able to read road signs, warnings, not to mention reading that our job requires.  To be a functioning part of society at least in someway, there is no choice but to attempt to be literate.  Maybe not so proficiently to read a novel, but it is important to adapt to your surroundings whatever they may be.  Thompson also had a rather similar argument, he claimed that to fit into the social writing that was happening online there is a “kairos—assessing their audience and adapting their tone and technique to best get their point across.” I found this very accurate, especially from an avid user of Facebook.  Since it’s a social writing world we live in now, in order to fit in the writer must be able to adapt to what its readers find appealing and thus adopting ‘kairos.’  I think both Scribner and Thompson do a very complete job in seeing our current way of writing as a new positive.  Now the current illiteracy (although it cant truly be measured) is overwhelmingly high I think it comes down to teaching the basics of reading and writing to every illiterate.  Facebook statuses and Tweets aren’t going to help someone who is truly illiterate, so I think the biggest problem the country has to face in the regards of literacy is going back to the basics most of us learned in our elementary school days.

Pictures vs. Words for the Uneducated

Although I have much more respect for Hedges argument than I did for Carrs’ I still feel like there is something missing from their arguments.  Maybe it’s because I am an educated student who doesn’t like the feeling of being talked to like a 10 year old but I don’t think Hedges gives any credit to the educated.  He makes the argument that “Hamlet” can be as entertaining as “The Lion King.”  However true that may be, it isn’t a fair playing field—he’s comparing to completely different types of media from different centuries.  I’m not sure about the rest of society but as an adult I’m not really looking toward Disney to give me my educational information.  Disney is an entertainment business…BUSINESS.  They create things to catch consumer’s attention.

Now I completely get why Hedges is making the argument that America relies heavily on what people tell them rather than what they think.  It was obvious in the Obama election that there were quite a few people who had no idea is Obama was a Republican or a Democrat but because he is black they voted for him regardless.  That is the sad part about our society that some are so easily swayed by a few flowery words and pretty pictures, but that’s only some of us.  Hedges says that the illiterate don’t vote because they aren’t educated enough to know what is going on.   But in all honesty although I understand a majority of what politics are talking about I would never be able to sit through hearing or reading all about every complicated word about policy.  I think it would be extremely difficult.  It’s not because I’m illiterate that I wouldn’t be able to read it, it because its not interesting to me to know every detail, as long as I understand the main point I think that is enough.  Isn’t that what the politicians are trying to do, make it easier for those who don’t have the means to be educated.  So although a lot of the population isn’t educated, the real problem isn’t blaming them for being tricked by pictures—the real problem is the society around them, that doesn’t help them to get an actual education.