Final draft

Here is my final draft
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Af6i16cwRwAqZGNwM3I1a2JfNWRmbmhjNWRx&hl=en

The Semester is Almost Over?

I vividly remember my first few weeks at the University of Louisville. Most of the time I felt like I was trapped on a treadmill that was at full speed. I kept up, but just barely. Now that finals week is upon us, I cannot believe that it is already over. As I begin to look back over the semester, I recognize how much I’ve learned and grown as a student. This class played a major role in that development. Rewriting by Joseph Harris helped me strengthen my writing in many ways. My research became more focused, because I began to use the techniques he discusses, especially ‘taking an approach’. I’ve been able to comprehend and apply the texts I read on a deeper level. My revisions have also improved dramatically. In high school, I proofread and edited countless papers, but I never really learned how to revise. Now, I understand that when revising you have to deal with thoughts and concepts that make up the paper, not just the wording. I also really enjoyed studying the news sphere. Before this class I rarely paid attention what was going on in the world. I have enjoyed learning how stories form and develop. I am more interested in current events and how they affect me than I have ever been before. Reading blogs and articles also helped me put things into perspective. I remember following a story in the Times about a reporter who was held captive in Afghanistan for almost ten months. It made my Chinese test seem pretty insignificant. I remember thinking to myself that if people can cope with imprisonment and tragedy around the world than I can surely pass my test. My views on writing and what it means to be a writer has also changed. Before I took this course, I thought that blogging was a form of online whining. After reading the Daily Dish and other blogs, I have a new appreciation for blogging. It is a great form of expression, a new form of writing that is virtually instantaneous. One writer can reach thousands of people in a matter of minutes. It is a revolutionary way of communication that in many ways transcends nationality, race, and age. I have learned a lot about writing and reading in this course, and it will continue to affect the rest of my academic career.

Second Essay

Here is my second essay
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Af6i16cwRwAqZGNwM3I1a2JfNGdnemh6c2d3&hl=en

Frustration-Taking an Approach

There are multiple ways in which a writer can take an approach. The first is a basic, elementary school type writing style in which one simply applies the concepts of another writer. It is in many ways similar to predicting the response of an author to a particular subject. Although this type of writing can be useful, it does not add or expand upon any existing ideas. In many ways, you are just repeating and reaffirming what the other author has already stated. Another strategy of taking and approach is much like forwarding. However, forwarding uses a few phrases or ideas, while taking an approach uses the entire intellectual style or sensibility of the author. Harris outlines three ways of positioning your work around those who have shaped your approach. They are: acknowledging influences, turning an approach on itself, and reflexivity.
It is very difficult to find an example of taking an approach online, because taking an approach often requires the involvement of an entire text or intellectual style. Taking an approach is often used in the writing of novels. I am currently reading an example of this writing style, a novel, Countess Below Stairs, by Eva Ibbotson that is a retelling Bronte’s Jane Eyre. Journalists are rarely given the freedom to take an approach when writing articles. They must be careful to stay unbiased and do not really have enough room in their article to incorporate a complex text or intellectual style. They can also rarely use the concept of reflexivity, because when there is limited space it is difficult to justify ‘cleaning the slate’ when you are already writing and unbiased article. On the other hand, editorials tend to be so opinionated that they would have little use for reflexivity as well. In a lot of ways, a blog or article cannot take an approach by itself. However, the combination of all of the articles or all of the blogs seems to convey an intellectual style of its own. If you were to hand an avid reader of the New York Times a printed version of a blog post, he or she would be able to almost instantly identify it as not The New York Times. One could say that this is because he or she recognizes the intellectual style of the paper and looks for that when he or she reads.

Countering Myself

After reading ‘America the Illiterate’, I was infuriated. I tried to respond as fairly as possible in my blog, but my opinion was still very biased. I am going to try and counter my previous statement to more fairly address the opinions expressed in the article.

“Hedges was stating that illiterate people should not be allowed to vote, or it is their fault there are so many problems in America… the tone makes illiterate people sound like helpless animals rather than human beings.”

Even though Chris Hedge’s article ‘America the Illiterate’ can be interpreted as offense and course, there are many valid points within his article which may help us understand some of the social problems and tensions occurring today. To say that Hedges, “makes illiterate people sound like helpless animals” is a severe exaggeration. In his article Hedges is not blaming these problems on the illiterate population. He is simply pointing out a cycle of illiteracy that feeds more incompetence. He is stating that uneducated and illiterate people do not have the mental capabilities necessary to make a logical decision when it comes to voting. Because they are dependent on the image-based culture, they are more susceptible to lies. If an individual has a basic understanding of algebra, how can he or she understand the consequences of the healthcare bill or the bailout? According to Hedges, nearly a third of the population is semi-literate, or illiterate. If one third of the population is voting based on lies rather than truth, how can this country hope to function, let alone remain a superpower? By pointing out this alarming flaw in the political system, it allows us to recognize and correct this issue. If enough people begin to realize that illiteracy is a major issue, then we can begin to take steps to improve our nation’s literacy. When closely looking at Hedge’s article, one will realize it is an attack on the lack of education in the United States, not illiterate people.

Countering

Many academic writers, including myself, have a tendency to try and prove another view point wrong rather then counter it. According to Harris, the aim of countering is to use another text's faults to create or refine a new line of thought. I could relate to Harris's example when he wrote a paper for graduate school, and his professor responded by saying, "Why are you spending so much time discussing the work of somebody you seem to think isn't very bright?". My senior English teacher and I had extrememly different view points. I believe that the principles of countering can also be applied in a discussion. We read Heart of Darkness and Empire of the Sun Mr. McBride and I frequently disagreed about the way the novels should be analyzed. For the first half of the semester we argued mulitple times a week, but there was never any resolution. After a few weeks I began to 'counter' his stance, rather then just argue with him. I'm not sure if his opinion changed in the slightest, but I know mine did. I still don't agree with him, but when I used the positive adn negative aspects of his views to refine my way of thinking I came to new conclusions that I never would have developed on my own. When we counter rather than argue we are able to develop new ways of thinking, which in my opinion, is the entire objective of academic study.
When considering the concepts of countering, I found a really interesting blog on the Daily Dish. A few months ago the records of a conversation between Thatcher and Gorbachev that took place two months before the fall of the Iron Curtain was released. In it Thatcher stated, “A destabilization of Eastern Europe and breakdown of the Warsaw Pact are also not in our interests.” In the blog "Margaret Thatcher, Secret Defender of Soviet Security" on September 10 the author underhandedly attacked the former Prime Minister for the above statement. The blogger simply stated, "...what's interesting is to see Thatcher, a neocon idol, acting in such brutally realist fashion. Toryism, even Thatcherism, is not neoconservatism, is it?". Although this does not seem particularly aggressive, the blog is topped by a picture of Bush awarding Thatcher with the Presidential Medal of Freedom. In the contradiction, lies the biting critisicm. In response to the first blog, a second blog defended the same quote made by Thatcher twenty years ago. The author compared Thatcher to a cop in a room full of hostages trying to calm down a criminal with a loaded gun. Rather then try and argue with the previous blogger, the second blog took the same quote and countered the other writer by providing more history and background information to put the same quote into a different context. By doing this the blog was able to better accomplish its goal of defending Thatcher then if he had just argued the points made by the first author.

Forwarding

In his book Rewriting Joseph Harris writes, “Much of academic discourse thus tends to proceed sideways, as writers take ideas and phrases from what they have read and reuse them in approaching a different set of texts and issues.” I believe that this is the best way to summarize the concept of forwarding in this chapter. According to Harris, there are four main ways to forward a text: illustrating or finding examples in other texts, authorizing or using another’s expertise to support your ideas, borrowing or using terms and ideas taken from another text to formulate your ideas, and extending or putting your own spin on another’s concepts. When using any of these four methods, the author is taking the ideas found in another text and recirculating them. Harris summarized an idea of Plato’s when writing, “…texts can become “fatherless,” detached from their authors and interpreted recklessly.” This can be easily seen with the circulation of information on the internet. I was casually scrolling through the Daily Dish, when I saw an article that looked rather interesting. I don’t have a very firm stance on ‘marriage-equality’, but it is interesting to hear how varied the views on this subject are. The blog in the Daily Dish took a quote directly from the blog Adam Serwer wrote for The American Prospect, Tapped. Although the opinions were very similar, it was interesting to see this example of authorizing. The Daily Dish used Adam Serwer’s work and reinforced it, giving it more emphasis and more of an impact on the reader. Oftentimes students feel like they need to quote someone famous or influential for it to be a valid quote. Although I recognize the importance of valid sources, I think that one can forward the ideas of people who may not be as well known but make a strong point, and have an even stronger point. After all, isn’t that the idea of academic writing? To discover new minds, with fresh ideas?

New York Times vs. Blogs

I have been following the New York Times and Andrew Sullivan’s ‘The Daily Dish’. I really enjoy reading both, but they are very different. When I read the ‘The Daily Dish’, I feel slightly overwhelmed by the diversity of each blog. On one hand, there is a blog about the best Halloween costumes which contained a YouTube video. The clips of a human keyboard cat and an iPhone costume that actually worked were very clever and fun to watch. However, that blog was followed by a blog about a gay man who is against marriage equality and an article about Ms. Scozzafava, a republican candidate who just withdrew from the race in Northern New York. After spending years in the public school system and reading standard articles in the newspaper, it is strange for me to flip from such extremes. I am used to focusing or concentrating on one topic, then switching to another. Skipping around from blogs for entertainment to informative information, almost gives me a sense of whip-lash. I enjoy it, but it will take some adjustment. The New York Times is more comfortable, if slightly less entertaining. I found an article about Ms. Scozzafava on the ‘Daily Dish’ and in The New York Times. I was surprised at how similar the articles were. Ms. Scozzafava withdrew from the election when she realized that she would come in third place. She claims to be a Republican, but she supports gay rights and abortion rights. I do not follow politics very closely, but it is disappointing that national conservative forces seem to be manipulating local elections. I never appreciated how important national and financial support is for a candidate. Even though her views better reflect that of the district, she has no shot at winning because she does not have the support she needs to campaign. I found it interesting that both the ‘Daily Dish’ and New York Times used the same quote by Ms. Scozzafava, “In recent days, polls have indicated that my chances of winning this election are not as strong as we would like them to be. The reality that I’ve come to accept is that in today’s political arena, you must be able to back up your message with money — and as I’ve been outspent on both sides, I’ve been unable to effectively address many of the charges that have been made about my record.” Even though the blog and article are not necessarily contradictory, it is interesting to see how a quote can be used in two such different sources.

Jarvis

In some ways, Sullivan supports Jarvis’s view of the press sphere; however, it does not give enough support to back Jarvis’s argument entirely. In his article, “Why I Blog”, Sullivan discusses the fluidity of the blogging. It is instantaneous and revolutionary. It allows an unlimited audience, without the interference of editors and publishers. Blogging has made writing interactive. Readers can respond to pieces immediately. Bloggers use the comments, arguments, and links of their readers in later blogs. Blogging is as much like participating in a conversation as it is writing. Jarvis also talks about the use of the internet and interaction of peers in his blog. He and Sullivan both feel that information is spread more quickly than ever before through the use of modern technology. However, to say that the press was the only source of news before the internet is like saying sci-fi novels were the only form of literature before blogging. Sullivan never claims that before the internet, writing was only communicated in one way. In fact, he states that Montaigne’s style of publishing and revising his essays was in many ways similar to blogging. Blogs are also slightly different than Jarvis’s model of the press sphere. A blog consists of the writing of a specific person or group of people. The blogger or bloggers may use links and sources to support their writing, but it is still their blog. Even though it is constantly being changed and updated, it is continuously theirs. The press sphere is a much vaguer concept. I can point to a blog and say “This is a blog”. How can you identify a press sphere? A press sphere is different for everyone. It will involve different sources for different people. Although blogs and the press sphere are both constantly changing, the press sphere is even less tangible than blogging.
Jarvis’s me-sphere fits my experience with the news most closely. I don’t agree with it entirely, but everyone interprets news differently. We all use different mediums and have different perspectives.

Jarvis

In his blog, “The Press Becomes the Press Sphere”, Jeff Jarvis has some interesting explanations for the shifts of power within the media. Jarvis describes the press-sphere as, “When we put the public at the center of the universe…we see the choices we all call upon: the press still, yes, but also our peers, media… search, links, original sources, companies, the government. It’s all information and we curate it and interact with it with the tools available.” According to Jarvis, the press no longer controls news like it used to. He believes that news used to be filtered through the press, but today we receive our news from a multitude of sources. In my opinion, his view is overly simplistic. It is undeniable that the way we receive news is changing. The internet has transformed the way information is transferred and shared. However, it is extremely inaccurate to state that the press was the only way news was spread ‘back-in-the-day’. Jarvis stresses the importance of the communication between peers as a source of news. Although it is easier to communicate with one another, our peers have not changed that much. We can connect and talk to people across the world with a touch of a button, but we still gravitate towards people who share our views and opinions. People were able to communicate by phone, and before that through letters. A prime example was during World War II. A lot of the news circulating in the states was inaccurate. The most accurate sources were letters written by soldiers. To this day, these personal accounts are used to gain a better understanding of what really happened during the war.

The New York Times

I have really enjoyed reading the New York Times. Now that I have begun reading it, I wish I had started reading it sooner. Whenever I get on, I glance at the headlines, but I go almost straight to the world section. The article that has drawn my attention the most was “7 Months, 10 Days in Captivity”. Every time I have gotten online I immediately begin looking for the latest section. I have been really sick the last few days, and I do not have internet at home, so I have not been able to read the latest sections. The story is the first hand account of David Rohde. He was in Pakistan researching the Taliban for a book he was writing. He had done multiple projects in the Middle East and was familiar with the customs of the people. Rohde arranged a meeting with one of the fraction leaders, but on his way there he and two of his associates were kidnapped. His account relates his experiences during the 7 and a half months of his captivity. I have had little time to read the New York Times, so reading this article has been like watching a fantastic movie that I have to stop and start repeatedly. I have been so drawn to this story, the other headlines only receive a passing glance on the b-line to the latest part. I have noticed that my interest in foreign affairs has changed. When I hear about the Middle East or Taliban on the new, I pay more attention than I have before. It has also peaked my interest in what I can do to help. It has made me ask myself how I can gain a better understanding of the Taliban; their motivations and goals. And, more importantly, what can I do to help protect people from this type of cruelty.

Blog Updates

Originally I was going to follow Glenn Beck’s blog, but after looking more closely I realized that it is not updated very often. I went back to Fox New’s main blog page and found a blog called “On the Scene”. It is updated by many different correspondents with Fox on important issues. It is updated all day, every day, so there is a never a shortage of news to catch up on. The most recent blog was about a 7 yr old girl from northern Florida who disappeared while walking home from school a few days ago. Police found her body two days later in a trash heap. Investigators from local, state, and federal agencies are searching for her killer. The format of the blog is designed for people on-the-go, who want to stay up to date on important stories, but do not have the time to read the paper or watch the news. It is also written fairly simply, so it is easy to pick out the important facts without reading all the extra information. It’s also very right-wing conservative. The other blog I'm following is the Daily Dish. The most recent blog is about an advertisement in Britain. It shows a father reader his daughter a bedtime story about the consequences of CO2. In the story, there are little puppies drowning and rabbits crying because they do not have enough water to drink. I think the advertisement had good intentions, but it was plain creepy. Sullivan’s blog leans more to the left, but it is also designed to be read quickly because it is short and concise. Many different authors contribute to the blog.

I am going to follow The Daily Dish by Sullivan, because, from my limited exposure to him, we seem to share similar views. I also really enjoy the way he writes.

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/#

I am not sure if this counts as a tradtitional blog, because they are short written pieces then a video, but i really like Glenn Beck, so I'm going to follow his blog.

http://glennbeck.blogs.foxnews.com/

News Comparison

I was surprised to discover that the majority of our news sources are similar. Hardly any of us actively engage in seeking out the news. It appears that most of our news gathering is passive. We hear news through other people, or we happen upon it while doing other things. Sometimes, if we are particularly interested in something, we will look it up online. However, even when we are online, we do not really get exposed to the news because we are only looking up one particular story or issue. I find it rather ironic that most of the class expressed the desire to pay more attention to current events, and yet none of us find or make the time. Civic literacy involves the circulation of texts in a public sphere. It is interesting that since more and more people have begun to rely on the internet for their news, it appears that the news had become one-sided. We have a tendency to read only things that interest us. Therefore, it is not surprising that the news has also begun to lean one way or the other to encourage more listeners or viewers. According to Hedges, “Those who rely on the Internet gravitate to sites that reinforce their beliefs. The filtering of information through an ideological lens, which is destroying television journalism, defies the purpose of reporting.” There was a time when the news was strictly factual, meant to inform rather than entertain. As newsrooms, newspapers, and radio stations are feeling the pressure to compete with one another they have to focus on both retaining or gaining the maximum number of customers and telling the truth. It is virtually impossible to do both at the same time.

A Melting Pot of Snippets

Even though I like to keep up to date with current events, I rarely have time to watch the news. When the news is on in a restaurant or doctor’s office, I am one of those annoying people who reposition their chair and get completely sucked into the report. However, when I have the time to watch TV at home, I am usually so worn out that I end up watching something that will not require too much thought on my part. I do listen to the radio a lot. I live about thirty minutes from campus, so my commute ends up being over an hour both ways. My truck, as much as I love it, is technologically unequipped. I do not have a CD player, and the tape player is broken; so I have plenty of time to listen to the radio during my drive. My mom sends me links to news videos that she thinks are interesting once every few days. Almost every time I get on Yahoo!, I see an article that seems interesting and I spend a few minutes reading over it. When the homework I am working on does not require too much concentration, I like to turn on the CNN video clips, and listen to them while I do my homework. Every once in a while, I will hear a story that interests me, so I will look it up online when I get home. For example, today I was spending time with my best friend and her family. Her mom was telling us about a baby whose stroller fell in front of a subway and survived. As soon as I got back to my friend’s dorm, we found the story online. I am ashamed to say that I don’t follow the news the way I should. My limited few of current events is a melting pot of snippets I here during my busy day.

Final Essay

Here is my final essay.
http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Af6i16cwRwAqZGNwM3I1a2JfM2M3emp3YmRj&hl=en

Nicole Denson
Professor Leake
English 105
28 September 2009
A New Age of Technology:
A Revolution in Reading and Writing
Since the creation of the internet in 1990, the World Wide Web has transformed the way we communicate. The technological progress that has been made within the last few decades will continue to affect our society for generations. The question is not whether it will affect us, but how. Studies, along with countless anecdotes, and personal experiences have shown that the internet has changed the way we read and write. Opinions about whether this change is good or bad range from one extreme to the other. It is nearly impossible to understand the far reaching consequences of this literary transformation; however, by trying to address the negative and positive results, we may be better prepared to deal with the issues that will face our generation and generations to come.
Before one can address the negative and positive attributes of the internet, he or she must understand what the internet actually is. According to the article, “The Web”, Tim Berners-Lee was a computer scientist working at CERN in the late 1980s. CERN is a particle physics laboratory near Geneva, which houses thousands of scientists using countless different computer systems. At the time, documents were stored hierarchically. The system was inefficient and complicated, so Berners-Lee proposed a new system that would solve CERN’s documentation problems. This proposal became what we now know as the internet. (Moyer)
Many people believe that the internet has had a negative effect on the way we read and write. It is difficult to deny their rationale when we begin to closely examine some of the changes happening today. One of the major problems facing the United States is the astonishing illiteracy rates. In his article, “America the Illiterate”, Chris Hedges states that over 42 million adults in the United States cannot read, and 50 million have the reading comprehension level of a fourth or fifth grader (1). That is nearly a third of the population of the United States, and the number of illiterate or semi-literate adults is increasing at an alarming rate of nearly 2 million a year. (Hedges, “Amer. the Illiterate” 1) The fact that the illiteracy rates are so high is frightening in and of itself, but when one considers some of the other statistics, the picture begins to look very grave.
According to Chris Hedges, when people read the New York Times, they spend about 45 minutes with the physical paper. The average viewer of the New York Times website is about 7 minutes (“Bad Days for Newsrooms” 2). There is a fundamental difference between reading and skimming. In the article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, Nicholas Carr relates a conversation he had with Bruce Friedman, a pathologist at the University of Michigan. Friedman told Carr, “I can’t read War and Peace anymore. I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it” (2). I have even noticed myself skimming rather than reading. When I was younger, I was an avid reader. My mom used to make me go to bed at 9:30 pm, and there were many evenings that I pretended to be asleep until I thought she had gone to bed. As soon as the coast was clear, I would slip my reading light and book out from under my pillow and silently find my page. I spent countless nights curled up in bed reading until I began to see sunlight creeping through my bedroom window. Today, I find it difficult to even make it through my required reading for class. If the illiteracy rates are increasing, and literate people are having more and more difficulty reading long texts, what does that mean for the literacy of our country?
Another concern is that we are becoming too overloaded with information that may, or may not, be accurate. Every time we get online, we are flooded with new bits of information, like which movie star just got divorced and where to buy the cheapest, designer purses. After being online for just a few hours, I often feel like my brain is weighed down with useless information. In his article, Nicholas Carr quoted the playwright, Richard Foreman, who stated that we risk becoming, “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button”(7). Even accurate or useful information can be misleading when read improperly. In “Bad Days for New Rooms”, Chris Hedges states, “Those who rely on the Internet gravitate to sites that reinforce their beliefs” (2). There is nothing wrong with blog posts and websites that are based on opinion. The danger is when people believe these opinions as if they are fact, and then use them to justify their own misguided views.
The concern that we are becoming too overloaded with information goes one step further. Sergey Brin and Larry Page created Google while they were working towards there doctorates at Stanford. In “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, Carr quotes them saying:
“The ultimate search engine is something as smart as people—or smarter,” Page said in a speech a few years back. “For us, working on search is a way to work on artificial intelligence.” In a 2004 interview with Newsweek, Brin said, “Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.” (6)
The idea of an artificial intelligence, let alone one attached to my brain, makes me feel rather uneasy.
I have a tendency to get wrapped up in conspiracy theories. I never get too carried away, but I enjoy contemplating the future and what it may hold, for better, but especially for worse. In my opinion, there is a fine line between individuality and the blogosphere. I am of the opinion that we are what we read. As the illiteracy rates in the United States begin to climb, the public is less able to educate themselves. They can only believe what they hear and are therefore cut off from the knowledge available to literate people (Hedges, “Amer. the Illiterate”). As we begin to skim rather than read, I am afraid that we will lose the depth of knowledge that comes from reading and analyzing a full length novel. The more people interact on the internet the more similar their writing, reading, and thinking will be. At first we may sound individual, but what happens when our thoughts and words become a series of hyperlinks to be skimmed over? Joseph Harris discusses his views of academic writing in his novel, Rewriting. I agree with his view that academic writing is rewriting what other people have already written (1). I believe that this concept includes all types of writing. Everything we do, think, and write has a basis in someone else’s ideas. As people become more apt to skim than read and summarize rather than write, what will happen to that sense of individuality that can only be truly expressed through long, eloquent prose?
On the other hand, the internet has become an intricate part of our everyday lives. There are an overwhelming number of benefits that even a cynic like me cannot dismiss. Through the internet, we are able to access an unlimited amount of information. With a few clicks of a button, I can find out anything from the current weather in China to the name of the Senator of Oklahoma. The majority of interactions in businesses and even on campuses like the University of Louisville take place through e-mail or on a website. In addition to the accessibility of information and the ease of communication, everyone is able to write online. In his article, “Why I Blog”, Andrew Sullivan states, “It was obvious from the start that it [blogging] was revolutionary. Every writer since the printing press has longed for a means to publish himself and reach—instantly—any reader on Earth” (3).
In the end, all we can do is speculate. It is impossible to know today what the lasting consequences of the internet and our changed literacy styles will be. There are many valid concerns; however, I believe the majority of people are too determined and strong willed to allow the internet or Artificial Intelligence to consume their individuality. I have always loved to read and write, but the way we think and therefore communicate has been changing and evolving for thousands of years. There has been a fear of change throughout the ages. Carr writes:
The arrival of Gutenberg’s printing press, in the 15th century, set off another round of teeth gnashing. The Italian humanist Hieronimo Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds. Others argued that cheaply printed books and broadsheets would undermine religious authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and spread sedition and debauchery. (7)
Without the printing press the world would be a much different and less educated place then it is today. Although I would hate to see the eloquence of prose get lost in the crossfire of modern technology, sometimes things must get lost for sake of progress.


Works Cited
Carr, Nicholas. "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" Weblog Post. Atlantic. Jul/Aug. 2008. 13 Sep. 2009 <http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200807/google.>
Harris, Joseph. Rewriting: How to do Things with Texts. Logan, Utah: Utah State
University Press, 2006
Hedges, Chris. “America the Illiterate.” Weblog Post. Truthdig. 10 Nov. 2008. 14 Sep. 2009 <http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20081110_america_the_illiterate/>
Hedges, Chris. “Bad Days for News Room.” Weblog Post. Truthdig. 21 Jul. 2008. 16 Sep. 2009 <http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080721_so_goes_the_newsroom_the_empire_and_the_world/>
Moyer, Michael. “The Web. (cover story).” Scientific American Vol. 301 Issue 3. Sep. 2009: 100. EBSCOhost. Univ of Louisville, Louisville, KY. 27 Sep. 2009 <http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=aph&AN=43608611&site=ehost-live>
Sullivan, Andrew. "Why I Blog." Weblog Post. Atlantic. Nov. 2008. 30 Aug. 2009 <http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200811/andrew-sullivan-why-i-blog>
Thompson, Clive. "Clive Thompson on the New Literacy." Weblog Post. Wired. 24 Aug. 2009.16 Sep. 2009

Essay

Here is my essay:

http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Af6i16cwRwAqZGNwM3I1a2JfMWdxOG1uNmR2&hl=en


A New Age of Technology:
A Revolution in Reading and Writing
Since the creation of the internet in 1990, the World Wide Web has transformed the way we communicate. The technological progress that has been made within the last few decades will continue to affect our society for generations. The question is not whether it will affect us, but how. Studies, along with countless anecdotes, and personal experiences have shown me that the internet has changed the way we read and write. Opinions about whether this change is good or bad range from one extreme to the other. It is nearly impossible to understand the far reaching consequences of this literary transformation; however, by trying to address the negative and positive results, we may be better prepared to deal with the issues that will face our generation and generations to come.
Before one can address the negative and positive attributes of the internet, he or she must understand what the internet actually is. Tim Berners-Lee was a computer scientist working at CERN in the late 1980s. CERN is a particle physics laboratory near Geneva, which houses thousands of scientists using countless different computer systems. At the time, documents were stored hierarchically. The system was inefficient and complicated, so Berners-Lee proposed a new system that would solve CERN’s documentation problems. This proposal became what we now know as the internet.
Many people believe that the internet has had a negative effect on the way we read and write. It is difficult to deny their rationale when we begin to closely examine some of the changes happening today. One of the major problems facing the United States is the astonishing illiteracy rates. In his article, American the Illiterate, Chris Hedges states the over 42 million adults in the United States cannot read, and 50 million have the reading comprehension level of a fourth or fifth grader. That is nearly a third of the population of the United States, and the number of illiterate or semi-literate adults is increasing at an alarming rate of nearly 2 million a year. The fact that the illiteracy rates are so high is frightening in and of itself, but when one considers some of the other statistics, the picture begins to look very grave.
According to Chris Hedges, when people read the New York Times, they spend about 45 minutes with the physical paper. The average viewer of the New York Times website is about 7 minutes. There is a fundamental difference between reading and skimming. In the article, Is Google Making Us Stupid?, Nicholas Carr relates a conversation he had with Bruce Friedman, a pathologist at the University of Michigan. Friedman told Carr, “I can’t read War and Peace anymore. I’ve lost the ability to do that. Even a blog post of more than three or four paragraphs is too much to absorb. I skim it.” I have even noticed myself skimming rather than reading. When I was younger, I was an avid reader. My mom used to make me go to bed at 9:30pm, and there were many evenings that I pretended to be asleep until I thought she had gone to bed. As soon as the coast was clear, I would slip my reading light and book out from under my pillow and silently find my page. I spent countless nights curled up in bed reading until I began to see sunlight creeping through my bedroom window. Today, I find it difficult to even make it through my required reading for class. If the illiteracy rates are increasing, and literate people are having more and more difficulty reading long texts, what does that mean for the literacy of our country?
Another concern is that we are becoming too overloaded with information that may, or may not, be accurate. Every time we got online, we are flooded with new bits of information, like which movie star just got divorced and wear to buy the cheapest, designer purses. After being online for just a few hours, I often feel like my brain is weighed down with useless information. In Nicholas Carr’s article he quoted the playwright, Richard Foreman, who stated that we risk becoming, “‘pancake people’—spread wide and thin as we connect with that vast network of information accessed by the mere touch of a button.” Even accurate or useful information can be misleading when read improperly. In Bad Days for New Rooms, Chris Hedges states, “Those who rely on the Internet gravitate to sites that reinforce their beliefs.” There is nothing wrong with blog posts and websites that are based on opinion. The danger is when people believe these opinions as if they are fact, and then use them to justify their own misguided views.
The concern that we are becoming too overloaded with information goes one step further. Sergey Brin and Larry Page created Google while they were working towards there doctorates at Stanford. In Is Google Making Us Stupid?, Carr quotes them saying: ““The ultimate search engine is something as smart as people—or smarter,” Page said in a speech a few years back. “For us, working on search is a way to work on artificial intelligence.” In a 2004 interview with Newsweek, Brin said, “Certainly if you had all the world’s information directly attached to your brain, or an artificial brain that was smarter than your brain, you’d be better off.”” The idea of an artificial intelligence, let alone one attached to my brain, makes me feel rather uneasy.
I have a tendency to get wrapped up in conspiracy theories. I never get too carried away, but I enjoy contemplating the future and what it may hold, for better, but especially for worse. In my opinion, there is a fine line between individuality and the blogosphere. I am of the opinion that we are what we read. As the illiteracy rates in the United States begin to climb, the public is less able to educate themselves. They can only believe what they hear and are therefore cut off from the knowledge available to literate people. As we begin to skim rather than read, I am afraid that we will lose the depth of knowledge that comes from reading and analyzing a full length novel. The more people interact on the internet the more similar their writing, reading, and thinking will be. At first we may sound individual, but what happens when our thoughts and words become a series of hyperlinks to be skimmed over? Joseph Harris discusses his views of academic writing in his novel, Rewriting. I agree with his view that academic writing is rewriting what other people have already written. I believe that this concept includes all types of writing. Everything we do, think, and write has a basis in someone else’s ideas. As people become more apt to skim than read and summarize rather than write, what will happen to that sense of individuality that can only be truly expressed through long, eloquent prose?
On the other hand, the internet has become an intricate part of our everyday lives. There are an overwhelming number of benefits that even a cynic like me cannot dismiss. Through the internet, we are able to access an unlimited amount of information. With a few clicks of a button, I can find out anything from the current weather in China to who is the Senator of Oklahoma. The majority of interactions in businesses and even on campuses like the University of Louisville take place through e-mail or on a website. In addition to the accessibility of information and the ease of communication, everyone is able to write online. In his article, Why I Blog, Andrew Sullivan states, “It was obvious from the start that it [blogging] was revolutionary. Every writer since the printing press has longed for a means to publish himself and reach—instantly—any reader on Earth”.
In the end, all we can do is speculate. It is impossible to know today what the lasting consequences of the internet and our changed literacy styles will be. There are many valid concerns; however, I believe the majority of people are too determined and strong willed to allow the internet or Artificial Intelligence to consume their individuality. I have always loved to read and write, but the way we think and therefore communicate has been changing and evolving for thousands of years. There has been a fear of change throughout the ages. Carr writes, “The arrival of Gutenberg’s printing press, in the 15th century, set off another round of teeth gnashing. The Italian humanist Hieronimo Squarciafico worried that the easy availability of books would lead to intellectual laziness, making men “less studious” and weakening their minds. Others argued that cheaply printed books and broadsheets would undermine religious authority, demean the work of scholars and scribes, and spread sedition and debauchery.” Without the printing press the world would be a much different and less educated place then it is today. Although I would hate to see the eloquence of prose get lost in the crossfire of modern technology, sometimes things must get lost for progresses sake.

Article

http://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0B_6i16cwRwAqMmEwNWFjYmMtYThjYy00NGI2LWI4ZGYtNzlhMWRkMTg3NWZi&hl=en

I am doing a project in my JA 200 about the effects of divorce on juvenile deliquency. This looked like a reliable article to get some back ground information on the science behind juvenile deliquency.

Blogging Reflection

On my first day of English 105, I was rather hesitant about blogging. I had a lot of common misconceptions: that it was whiney and too personal, to name a few. After reading and writing multiple blogs, my views on internet writing has completely changed. The most challenging part of these posts was to look at them objectively. Some of the pieces I found infuriating and completely one-sided. Others were closer to my own opinions, but sometimes it is even harder to read those impartially, because I agree with the author. I was surprised that a lot of bloggers are very well informed in their fields. I always assumed bloggers were a cheap version of journalists who only pretend to know what they are talking about without any substantial research or support. Andrew Sullivan shattered that view in the first article we read. Even the articles by Hedges, though I firmly disagree with him, were well thought out and well written. My web habits have not really changed that much, but I look at the internet differently. I pay closer attention to what my friends and I write, because I wonder if the internet really is changing the way we think. I also try to read everything, rather than skimming an article or e-mail, because I enjoy reading and I do not want to lose the ability to focus on a novel. It may seem a little bit silly, but a little bit of precaution can go a long way. For the most part, I still chat on Facebook and check my e-mail like every other teenager.

Blood on the floor? or Revolution in writing??

In his article, “Bad Days for Newsrooms—and Democracy”, Hedge states his opinion in the first paragraph: “The decline of newspapers is about the rise of the corporate state, the loss of civic and public responsibility, … the intellectual poverty of our post-literate world, a world where information is conveyed primarily through rapidly moving images rather than print”. The more I read by Chris Hedges, the less I like him. However, he does have some valid points. It is undeniable that the news we hear and read today is quite different than that of our parents’ generation or even of my childhood. News is now designed to amuse rather than inform. From sizzling gossip columns to snappy news anchors, vessels that used to relay information have become yet another form of entertainment. Out of curiosity I visited Yahoo and MSN to see what news headlines popped up first. On Yahoo, the headline was “NFL player fined for message on shoes”. On MSN, “The New Hair Club for Men” which discussed which stars have bad hair implants, was front-and-center. This is news? What about the War in Iraq or the recession? To me, that seems a bit more prevalent then celebs’ hair and stunts by NFL players. I do have to agree that the rise of corporate states have a major part to play in the decline of newsrooms. Time Warner, Disney, Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp., General Electric and Viacom control virtually everything we read or hear. In my opinion, this is more to blame than the literacy rates in America. Thompson’s view of the effect of the internet on literacy is opposite of Hedge’s. Thompson argues that the internet is changing the way we write, but not making people illiterate. According to a study, over 30% of the writing that occurs is outside of school. This has forced writers of my generation to focus on their audience rather than pleasing a professor. On the other hand, I think it is important to remember that this study was conducted with students, which, when you consider Hedge’s arguments about people who are semi-literate or uneducated, is not really applicable when comparing their opinions.

Illiterates or animals?

I believe it is safe to say that this is by far the most depressing blog we have read for this class. At first when I read it, I was offended. I have worked with a lot of different people from all walks of life. I have done a great deal of volunteer work through church and the refugee center in Bowling Green. I have worked with a lot of illiterate people. While reading this article, it reminded me strongly of my time working in Louisiana over the summer. I absolutely loved working down there. I worked with the renovations on Fort Polk. The first day I went to work I was petrified. All the guys I worked with were huge, and most of the girls looked like they could beat the tar out of me without batting an eye. It did not take me long to realize that they were not as bad as they appeared. Once I got to know them, I realized they were some of the most sincere, generous people I have ever met. Most of them were illiterate or semi-literate. When I started reading this article, I was livid. It seemed like Hedges was stating that illiterate people should not be allowed to vote, or it is their fault there are so many problems in America. After re-reading it, I think he was not so much trying to blame the illiterate population, as much as point out an alarming social problem facing Americans today. All the same, I think his article is very one sided. The tone makes illiterate people sound like helpless animals rather than human beings. In my opinion, an effort should be made to improve education and political awareness. That is the only way this country will get turned around. Although he had some data, it was not very concise and rather misleading. His opinion was expressed so strongly that I felt immediately on the defensive. Hedge and Carr have similar views about how technology is detrimental to the public. They both think that the internet is making people think differently. Although, ironically enough Hedge seems to think it is making the public more stupid than Carr does, which completely contradicts the title of the last blog we read.

Google-not stupid, just robots

Nicholas Carr’s article, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”, is more than a little bit disconcerting. I have to admit; I have a tendency to get wrapped up in conspiracy theories and outlandish speculations. I am not one of those people who have a secret bunker in their basement, but I enjoy contemplating the future and what it may hold, for better, but especially for worse. Although the title is eye-catching, I do not think it conveys Carr’s opinion very well. His point is not necessarily that Google is making us stupid; he believes it is changing the way we read and comprehend information. The accessibility and ease of information on the internet is creating a generation of readers that skim rather than immerse themselves in texts. In the golden age of literature, full length novels were hundreds of pages long. Now, it is rare if a text can keep our interest for more than a few pages. I have even noticed this pattern in my own life and reading. I began reading at a very young age. By the time I was in eighth grade, my standardized test scores stated my reading comprehension was equivalent to that of a college sophomore. Until a few years ago, I was an avid reader. It was unusual to see me without a book when I was growing up. Now, I have difficulty focusing on books like I used to. I still enjoy reading, but the books the capture my interest have to be much faster paced. I used to love reading Jane Austen. I still enjoy her works, but it requires a lot of coffee and ‘cell phone breaks’ for me to make it through even a few chapters.
I can relate better to Carr’s article than any of the other articles I have read in this course. The other articles have valid points, but I share some of the same fears as Carr. When I was in high school, I wanted to be a writer, and part of me still clings to that desire to write and be read. The accessibility to an extensive audience found through blogging is an amazing opportunity, but is it worth the cost? Are truly talented authors being drowned in the mayhem of the blogosphere? Another concern of mine is the fine line of individuality. Sullivan argues that blogging is a great way to express individuality, but is it? At first our blogs may sound individual, but what happens when our thoughts and words become a series of hyperlinks to be skimmed over? I agree with Harris’s view of academic writing- it is rewriting what other people have already written. I believe that this concept includes all types of writing. Everything we do, think, and write has some basis in someone else’s ideas. As people become more apt to skim than read and summarize rather than write, what will happen to that sense of individuality that can only be truly expressed through long, eloquent prose?

Harris Blog

I found Harris’s first two articles in Rewriting to be a very unique perspective than what I am accustomed to. He explains academic writing as “in response to the work of others”. He goes on to explain that academic writing, or what he calls ‘rewriting’, is a process by which a writer analyzes and expands on the works of others. According to Harris, academic writing and reading are interrelated. A writer clearly has to read other works before he or she can expand upon it. When reading critically, Harris suggests four methods: coming to terms, forwarding, countering, and taking an approach. Coming to terms involves comprehending and re-presenting a text. Basically, to understand a text so well that you can explain its intent or purpose without directly quoting the author. Forwarding is the concept of recirculating texts or ideas while adding ideas or insights to them. Although countering typically makes one think of an argument or rebuttal, it is not quite the same according to Harris. He says that a proper counter-argument must recognize the positive attributes of a text and rethink or expand its weaker points. Taking an approach is similar to putting yourself into an author’s shoes. You try to draw from an author’s style and apply it to other texts. These four methods for critical reading apply directly to one of the most important parts of the writing process: revision. When an author is able to apply these principles to their own work, he or she can advance their writing tremendously. The purpose of writing is not so much to follow a strict pattern as much as to fulfill a certain function. Every text has a purpose. The value in a text is not in the form; rather, it is determined by whether or not it fulfills its function. Harris and Sullivan share some similar opinions in writing. I found it interesting that both seem more concerned with the function or purpose of a text than any other literary aspect. Sullivan likes that blogging is unstructured. This lack of structure is the reason that blogging is such a powerful tool of self expression, or as he stated, “writing out loud”.

Comparison of classmates internet habits

After looking over my classmates’ internet notes, I noticed a few interesting details. The majority of the sites they visited are either sites I visit frequently or sites I am nonetheless familiar with. Among some the guys, I often saw “ESPN” sprinkled in between Facebook and e-mail. Others, visited news sites, which at first surprised me, and then I remembered I am in an honors class, and not everyone in the world is as unsuccessful at keeping up to date with current events as I am. Many of my classmates listen to Pandora. At first, when I looked through the blogs everything seemed very repetitive. The majority of us visit similar, if not the same, sites. I started to reflect on the diversity of our class. All of us are honors students, but beyond that we are very different. We have different views and hobbies. Many of us live on campus, while others (like me) commute half an hour or more. If we all come from such diverse backgrounds, why are our internet logs so similar?? It reminded me of a comment one of my classmates made. (Turning this assignment in late, gave me the benefit of hearing others opinions first.) He wrote, “Saying what one does on the internet doesn’t really define one’s personality. Saying where one does it however speaks volumes about their personality.” This quote is a little bit misleading, but I think I know what he means. You can see a lot about our personalities by what sites we visit. One could safely say that the majority of my peers have an interest in social networking (Facebook and email), music (Pandora and YouTube), and schoolwork (Louisville.edu). The extra sites one visits, or what one does within those sites can give a lot of insight into their personality. For example, because I visit MapQuest, one could infer I like to travel or was traveling last weekend.

Internet Habits

Internet Habits
Saturday, 9/5:
10:15am- MapQuest Coxs Creek to Bowling Green
10:25- check Facebook
11:00- check MySpace
11:10- Google “Juvenile Delinquency” – research for Crime and Justice class
12:20pm - check Yahoomail
12:30- check school email
12:38- check Blackboard
1:00- check bank account

Sunday, 9/6
1:00pm- Tattoo/ Piercing parlors in Bowling Green (Dan’s iphone)
1:15- definition of obstinate (Dan’s iphone)
11:45- yahoo forecast (for drive home)


This doesn't neccisarily show my typical internet habits, because I still don't have internet at home. I drove to McDonalds on Saturday to get directions and do a little bit of homework. On Sunday, I was visiting some friends in Bowling Green.

Why I Blog Response

Andrew Sullivan’s article, “Why I blog”, was an insightful explanation of blogging. It was fascinating to read a famous blogger’s opinion and perspective. I found it extremely interesting that he did not think blogging would replace traditional writing. In fact, he argued that the blogosphere created a new generation of readers who are interested in nonfiction. He feels that the nature of blogging makes traditional writing invaluable. In the article, Sullivan gives a multitude of reasons why he blogs. One reason he blogs is because blogging is unstructured by nature. He states, “[Blogging] allows for no retroactive editing … and removes from the act of writing any considered or lengthy review”. Blogging is, therefore, a random expression of instant thought. It is a free-write that is informal and riddled with minor errors that are scarce in the realm of traditional journalism. Another fascinating aspect of blogging is the balance between individual voice and the collective mind. Blogs are personal and filled with emotion. Sullivan describes it as “writing out loud”. Blogs expose an author more than any other literary outlet. Because blogging demands a more spontaneous and passionate response than any other form of writing, the reader is able to look directly at the author. The author cannot hide behind layers of editing and revising. On the other hand, anyone can be a critic. Blogs are mercilessly scrutinized by their readers. This scrutiny allows readers to collectively dictate the direction of the blogosphere. The collective mind of bloggers and readers is constantly evolving. Blogging is a new form of writing, that rather than replacing traditional writing, has expanded the public’s definition of writing and civic literacy.

First Blog

I have never written a real blog before, so this is a brand new experience. I have posted some poems on MySpace, but it’s not quite the same. The most difficult part of creating the blog was I do not have internet at home. That is why my blog is so late. I live over thirty minutes from campus, and I have not found a place close to home with Wi-Fi. I had to wait until I had gas money to drive back to campus and do my homework. The most surprising part of creating a blog was all of the options. It was fun to fill out the questionnaire about my interests. There are a few similarities between blogging and making a MySpace or Facebook. The way that you can personalize your blog, like changing the back ground or filling out the “about me” section, is very similar to networking sites, but the main purpose is completely different. I use MySpace and Facebook to keep in touch with friends or as an easy way to keep everyone updated about what is going on in my life. Blogging is quite different. It requires more forethought. It is a great way to express yourself and your ideas in a way that is constructive and free for anyone to read. Blogging is a form of writing. In my opinion, it is something between a free-write and a personal expressive piece. Most of the time, I do not let people read my free-writes. When I write a blog, there is a little more pressure to write articulately, because I know other people are going to read it.