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>.