Analyzing My Genre

Enokson (2010) "Fiction Genres" via Flickr
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

For Project 3, I have decided to write an opinionated blog post (almost like an article, but more personal) that would be published on Buzzfeed. Below I have provided links to 5 examples of the genre I will be writing in. I have also answered questions about my genre from Writing Public Lives page 342.

5 Examples of Articles:

• Example 1
• Example 2
• Example 3
• Example 4
• Example 5

Social Context:
The genre of an article is typically set in a magazine or in an online magazine or news source. The subject of the genre is reporting on specific news events or writing opinionated versions of those events for a specific news source. The audience of this genre is typically anyone with a baseline education who wants to or enjoys reading articles as a source of information on various topics/events. The genre is used to provide a source of information for the general public as well as to display a certain view the author or the audience might have on a specific topic. Articles are typically informational and concern specific events that have occurred recently or events that occurred in the past and are still have effects today. 

Rhetorical Patterns of The Genre:
Professional articles are meant to be truthful/ethical pieces of work that provide various information and sometimes opinions on specific subjects/events. Therefore, unethical or false information is excluded from the genre in order for the author or source of publication to maintain credibility as a news source. Articles that are published online provide hyperlinks to sources where the author received specific information. The formatting is similar to that of a QRG, however, it is a little more formal. In terms of rhetoric, articles generally appeal to ethos and logos (ethics, credibility, and logic). However, in some cases, particularly with opinionated articles, authors tend to use pathos (emotion) in their writing as well. The sentences and style of this genre are typically active and simple/complex depending on the topic. However, like I said, articles are typically formal and so the language, word-choice, and tone are professional. 

What The Patterns Reveal About The Social Context:
The genre includes anyone who is interested in the information the article is discussing or anyone who has been affected by the topic/event that is being written about. The genre encourages writers to write truthful/ethical work. Depending on the article and it's purpose, the audience could be encouraged to react or think a certain way after reading the work. The most valuable content of an article is the information and how that information is displayed and stated by the author. The least valuable content are the extra details that most articles contain like images (if there are too many) and/or comment sections for the readers. 

Reflection:
I read Jenny and Rachel's "Analyzing My Genre" posts. After reading and commenting on their posts, I noticed that our genres are fairly similar. Both Jenny and Rachel are writing editorials, so their posts were fairly similar. Though I am writing an article, the conventions of my genre are pretty similar. All three of us feel strongly about the specific uses of rhetorical strategies in our genres. Because of project 2, we already have a good understanding of how to implement rhetorical strategies effectively into our own writing. This will help us successfully build our arguments and credibility in our projects and with our targeted audiences. Overall, I think that I have a clear understanding of my genre, the article, as well as how I want to design/organize it. 

Considering Types

In this blog post, I will be considering which types of arguments that I will be using for my public argument in Project 3. 

(2010) "Men Arguing" via Flickr
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

There are two types of arguments that I am considering for my Public Argument project.The first being the Causal Argument. The Causal Argument, "introduces your argument to the causes of a specific problem or phenomenon in our society" (Writing Public Lives, 414). This is what I plan to do in my writing for Project 3. Additionally, the book states, "by pointing to the cause, you are able to also help your audience understand the potential solutions to the controversy" (Writing Public Lives, 414).

I am also considering the Evaluative Argument for my writing in Project 3. The Evaluative Argument "evaluates the successfulness of a specific policy, idea, solution to a problem, etc." (Writing Public Lives, 414). Both of these argument types would work with my public argument because I plan to explain the problems and causes of problems that Rolling Stone had with their original UVA rape article as well as evaluate the solutions that SPJ's Code of Ethics for professional journalism provides.

Reflection:
After reading and replying to Jenny and Rachel's blog posts on "My Rhetorical Action Plan" and "Considering Types", I have found that we all have a pretty good idea of which argument type best suits what we are trying to achieve in our own arguments. Also, after discussing the different types of arguments in class, I realized that the evaluative argument wouldn't work for my project. A more effective alternative to the causal argument would be the refutation argument. This is because I want to point out the mistakes that Rolling Stone made and explain why they were wrong and why what they thought was okay to publish actually wasn't. Below I have provided the links to Jenny and Rachel's blog posts that I was referring to in my reflection.

Jenny:
"My Rhetorical Action Plan"
"Considering Types"

Rachel:
"My Rhetorical Action Plan"
"Considering Types"

My Rhetorical Action Plan

In this post, I will be answering questions in order to develop my rhetorical action plan for Project 3.

Beltz (2007) "World Map" via Wikimedia
Public Domain License

1. Audience

• Knowledge
• My audience will have a lot of background on my topic/controversy. It is a very well known topic because it had such a large impact when it first occurred. The audience will have gotten their knowledge from the original article written by Rolling Stone, the articles written in response to Rolling Stone's article being retracted, the news, blogs, tweets, etc. Additionally, I am from Virginia and have many ties to the UVA campus and this news of Jackie's alleged attack and Rolling Stone's article were a huge deal in the area for a very long period of time. They still are, because the rumors continue to haunt the UVA campus, whether or not they are true. 
• Values
• The values of the audience vary; some people argue that Rolling Stone is in the wrong and UVA is the victim while others argue that Jackie is in the wrong for lying and Rolling Stone is the victim. The audience that will agree with my argument will have the values of ethical journalism and the following of SPJ's Code of Ethics for professional journalism (like Rolling Stone). Additionally, regardless whether or not Jackie is telling the truth, particularly because we don't know, the audience will expect empathy towards Jackie in writing. She could have been attacked but fabricated her story. 
• Standards
• I will be using a lot of research found in my articles I used for Project 1 (QRG). The information against Rolling Stone's credibility as a news source can be easily translated to my audience by provided various examples of where and why Rolling Stone went wrong and why it is their fault, not Jackie's. 
• Visual Elements
• I don't really understand this question, however, if I am interpreting this right, my audience will respond to visual images/elements that evoke emotion. My information against Rolling Stone's credibility and how the public cannot trust them as a source will evoke emotions possibly of anger or disappointment.  
• Purpose
• My audience will be reading/interested in my argument because they share the same values and beliefs as me regarding Rolling Stone. I hope to expand their understanding on how Rolling Stone and its writers failed as journalists by not following SPJ's Code of Ethics. It will encourage my audience of journalists to write ethically in order to maintain credibility and it will encourage my audience of news seekers to be wary of things reported in the media.

2. Genre

• Blog
• The genre of blogging is personal/reflective writing and can often be opinionated. It is supposed to be informative on the author's thoughts and opinions for the audience. I am considering creating a blog post for Project 3 because I think it would be an effective way to share my own opinions on my topic while also making the writing a bit more personal and fun. Blog posts are generally written and published on the author's blog page; blog pages keep all of the author's posts in one place and they could follow a certain theme/topic or they could also be random posts the author wanted to write about. If I were to write a blog, it would be very opinionated and I would use various rhetorical strategies to evoke emotion from my audience and gain their support. I would also take advantage of the logical aspects in rhetoric with my writing because I will be referencing the SPJ Code of Ethics in professional journalism. In a blog post, I could add a picture or two to add more of a visual element. The style of blog posts are commonly informal however, some people enjoy writing formal blog posts. 
• Example 1
• Example 2

• Article
• The genre of an article in a newspaper or magazine (online or in print) can often be opinionated and is generally for informational purposes. Articles are usually written to report on a specific happening and provide detailed information about that happening. I think that an opinionated article would be an effective way to inform my readers on my topic as well as express my values and beliefs on the subject. Writing in this genre, I would use rhetorical strategies to evoke emotion from my audience and gain their support. I would also take advantage of the logical aspects in rhetoric with my writing because I will be referencing the SPJ Code of Ethics in professional journalism. An article could have a header image and an eye-catching title. Articles are generally formal, academic, and informative. These aspects of articles would suit my topic well. Additionally, many articles have already been written about my topic.
• Example 1
• Example 2

3. Responses/Actions

• Positive Reactions
• I would like for my audience to reconsider the importance of ethics in journalism not only from the writer's position but from the people seeking information as well.
• I hope that journalists who read my article will be encouraged to practice truthful/ethical journalism.
• I hope my audience will share my values/beliefs after reading my work.
• Negative Rebuttals
• Some people will argue that Jackie is the one at fault and Rolling Stone is the victim. To this, I would argue that whether or not that is true, Rolling Stone is still responsible for what they publish on their website and in their magazines. They knew that they didn't have sufficient research but decided to post the article/story anyways. 
• Some people would argue that we still don't know if Jackie told the truth or not regardless of the fact that there is no evidence and that it is unethical to say that she lied. To this, I would argue that sufficient evidence has been found to rightfully assume that Jackie lied, regardless to whether or not she was attacked at some point.
• Some people would argue that Rolling Stone couldn't have prevented their faults. To this, I would argue that they definitely could have. It was Rolling Stone's responsibility to publish truthful work and they failed to do so. 

Analyzing Purpose

For this blog post I have created a coggle. To access my coggle, please click "HERE". 

Stansbury, Addie (2015) "Analyzing Purpose Cluster" via Coggle

Analyzing Context

In this blog post, I will be answering a few questions about the context of my public debate.

Gilbert, Sarah (2007) "grand central bakery" via Flickr
Attribution Non-Commercial Share-Alike 2.0 License

1. What are the key perspectives or schools of thought on the debate that you are studying?
Majority of the perspectives on my argument are against Rolling Stone, calling the UVA rape article a failure of journalism for lack of proper research and ethics. However, there are still many people who argue that Rolling Stone was the victim of the situation and that Jackie is the only one in the wrong. 

2. What are the major points of contention or major disagreements among these perspectives?
The main points of contention are who is at fault for the UVA rape Rolling Stone scandal. 

3. What are the possible points of agreement, or the possible common ground between these perspectives?
That both are at some sort of fault because there was not enough research done and Jackie lied about her alleged attack.

4. What are the ideological differences, if any, between the perspectives?
Many people who blame Rolling Stone for the scandal accuse the people who blame Jackie of being unethical for blaming a girl who could have been raped, whether or not her story was completely true. 

5. What specific actions to their perspectives or texts ask their audience to take?
For my chosen argument (against Rolling Stone), the audience is supposed to recognize what failures occurred in the writing and researching of Erdley's "article" on Jackie's alleged attack on the UVA campus.   

6. What perspectives are useful in supporting your own arguments about the issue? Why did you choose these?
I think that the perspectives against Rolling Stone are useful for my own argument because I think that it was a failure of journalism that Sabrina Erdley didn't complete sufficient research; she wrote a story not an article. 

7. What perspectives do you think will be the greatest threat to your argument? Why so?
That Rolling Stone is a victim because Jackie made everything up and they couldn't have known that she was lying (but they could have assumed since their was no evidence). 

Reflection:
After reading Jenny and Rachel's blog posts on Analyzing Context, I realized that I could have been more specific when discussing the different perspectives of my audience and possible disagreements. Jenny did a great job of providing specific descriptions of different perspectives and audiences as well as considering the major disagreements among the perspectives. Rachel's post was very detailed and well thought out. I realize now that I could have done more in responding to these questions regarding the different perspectives of my audiences. 

Audience and Genre

In this post, I will be identifying 2-3 specific groups of individuals who could potentially be my audience for Project 3 (my act of public speech).

Mirkolorenz (2010) "Data Driven Journalism Process" via Wikimedia
CC BY-SA 3.0 License

1. Journalists or future journalists learning about failures of journalism or simply the Rolling Stone UVA rape failure. 
Like me, future journalists are interested in learning more about journalism successes as well as its failures. To understand and meet the requirements and expectations of professional journalism, one must observe the mistakes of journalism as well. Because the Rolling Stone UVA rape scandal was recent and had such an impact on journalism concerning rape and sexual assault, it is still a hot topic for journalists to learn and gossip about. 

Where would you publish your research?

• Article
• Similar to the articles that I have been referring to for my own research, I could write a magazine or online article for my act of public speech. Writing in this genre, with magazine or online magazine articles in particular, is an easy and effective way of get the desired information and argument across to my targeted audience. 
• Example 1
• Example 2
• Interview Q & A
• This could be a video or written interview where I ask questions regarding the controversy for my act of public speech. 
• Example 1
• Example 2

2. Rolling Stone & fanatics or anti-fanatics  
Rolling Stone has been keeping up with the good, but mostly bad, press that has followed their UVA rape article scandal. They are aware of the mistakes they made in publishing the article and of the consequences that have followed those mistakes. Additionally, many people's views on Rolling Stone have been altered since the retraction of the article. 

Where would you publish your research?

• Article Review
• Though it has already been done many times by several journalists, I could write a review to Rolling Stone's UVA rape article, for my act of public speech, that explains where, in my opinion, Rolling Stone went wrong. The Columbia School of Journalism review is the best example I can think of that picked apart the process and failures of Erdley's story and Jackie's alleged rape.
• Example 1
• Example 2

• Quick Reference Guide
• Although I am not allowed to write in this specific genre because I already have for Project 1, it would be an effective way to organize my information, especially since a lot of the information is spread out over the past year. It took a long time and a lot of work to investigate Jackie's alleged rape as well as where Rolling Stone went wrong.
• Example 1
• Example 2

Extended Annotated Bibliography

fixedandfrailing (2014) "Citations 2" via Flickr
Attribution Share-Alike 2.0 Generic License

In this post I will attach a google doc of my annotated bibliography for Project 3. In this annotated bibliography, I have only found 5 new sources so far. However, there are many sources from my annotated bibliography for Project 1 that I will be able to use in Project 3. 

To access my annotated bibliography for Project 3, please click "HERE". 

Narrowing My Focus

The most important questions for me to answer/learn more about in my act of public speech are the following:

Neutrality, (2005) "Question Mark" via Wikimedia
Public Domain

1. How has this controversy effected Rolling Stone?

2. How has Rolling Stone responded to this controversy?

3. Where, specifically, did Rolling Stone go wrong?

4. Learn more about the specific people involved and their impact on the controversy.

I think that these questions are the most important and interesting questions to answer as I move further along with Project 3 because the controversy only began when Rolling Stone decided to publish the story of Jackie's alleged gang rape at UVA in 2012. Being a journalist major, I want to focus on/learn more about the process, failures, and gray areas, that Rolling Stone faced when writing, publishing, and then retracting Savannah Erdley's story that was meant to be a piece of journalism. 

Questions About Controversy

For project 3, I have decided to participate in the public debate on Rolling Stone's UVA rape story that was published and then retracted in late last November and early December.

Neutrality, (2005) "Question Mark" via Wikimedia
Public Domain

Series of focusing questions to reframe the controversy as you prepare to enter the public conversation:

Who is involved in the controversy?
1. What more should we know about the author, Sabrina Erdley?
2. What can we learn about Jackie's friends whom she contacted after the alleged attack?
3. How does the article portray these friends?
4. Who from Rolling Stone played a major role in the controversy?
5. Who was the accused attacker who instigated the alleged gang rape?
6. Who on the UVA campus is prevalent in this controversy?

What is up for debate in this controversy?
1. What was true in Jackie's story?
2. What was false in Jackie's story?
3. Where, specifically, did Rolling Stone go wrong?
4. How is Rolling Stone in some ways a victim?
5. What more can we learn about the role ethics has played in this controversy?

When has this controversy unfolded?
1. What is significant about the fact that Jackie reported her rape more than a year after she says it occurred?
2. When were other articles that were written about this controversy published? Why? Is this significant?
3. Recently after the retraction of the UVA rape article, were other reported rape and sexual assaults reported on or not? 
4. How long after the article was published was it retracted?
5. When was the last article written about this controversy? Are they still being written?

Where has this controversy unfolded?
1. What more can we learn about how this controversy has changed life on UVA's campus?
2. What more can we learn about how this controversy has changed life on other college campuses?
3. What more can we learn about how this has effected the lives of other rape and sexual assault victims in the US?
4. How has this affected the fraternity of Phi Kappa Psi in the US?
5. How has this controversy effected Rolling Stone?

How has this controversy has unfolded?
1. How did Erdley reach out to Jackie? 
2. How did Erdley even know to contact Jackie in the first place?
3. How has UVA's community reacted to this alleged attack?
4. How did Phi Kappa Psi respond to this alleged attack?
5. How has the public responded to this alleged attack?
6. How has Rolling Stone responded to this controversy?

Reflection on Project 2

In this blog post, I will be reflecting on Project 2 by answering a few questions from Writing Public Lives page 520. 

Howcheng, (Unknown) "Mount Hood Reflected in Mirror Lake, Oregon" via Wikimedia
Public Domain

1. What was specifically revised from one draft to another?
I don't really understand this question. To me, the answer would be all the things I was looking for when editing my paper. I looked for grammatical errors, spelling errors, disorganization of my points, unnecessary  information, places where I needed more evidence or analysis, making sure my points related well to my thesis, etc.

2. Point to global changes: how did you reconsider your thesis or organization?
At the beginning of the process of drafting, my thesis was much less specific and didn't completely meet the requirements of the assignment. After talking in class about thesis statements and introductions, I got a better idea of what I needed to change in order to have a more successful thesis. I asked myself questions that would help guide more critical thinking like, "how does the author use rhetorical strategies?" and "why does the use of these strategies make his/her writing more or less effective in persuading its audience?". In the end, my thesis included a more direct argument about rhetorical strategies used by the author of my text and was much more specific. 

3. What led you to these changes? A reconsideration of audience? A shift in purpose?
A shift in purpose. After a few class discussions on what was expected for this assignment, I began to better understand where I was going and how I was going to get there. Additionally, I began thinking more about my audience in relation to the text. This helped me particularly when writing the analysis of my evidence and being able to successfully relate it back to my main argument.  

4. How do these changes affect your credibility as an author?
Considering my audience gave me and the author of my text more credibility, particularly when explaining the use of rhetorical strategies in relation to the audience. 

5. How will these changes better address the audience or venue?
I also don't really understand how to answer this question... Considering the values of the audience is important in order to gain the support and trust of the audience. 

6. Point to local changes: how did you reconsider sentence structure and style?
I didn't want to completely change my sentence structure because I feared losing my own voice in my writing. However, there were certain sentences that I changed to make them more clear. 

7. How will these changes assist your audience in understanding your purpose?
It will make my essay easier to read and understand, therefore assisting my audience in understanding the overall purpose of the essay.

8. Did you have to reconsider the conventions of the particular genre in which you are writing?
Yes, at first I began writing an essay that was just strictly analyzing my chosen text. However, as I moved further into the deadline and discussed the project in class, I got a better idea of how to write a rhetorical analysis. 

9. Finally, how does the process of reflection help you reconsider your identity as a writer?
This is a very difficult question... Well, after writing my rhetorical analysis and reflecting on it, I realized that I have gained many more skills as a writer and have learned a lot about writing in different genres. 

Project 2 - Rhetorical Analysis

To view the final version of my rhetorical analysis, please click "HERE".

Live Life Happy (2012) "Start strong, stay strong, and finish strong" via Flickr
Attribution Share-Alike 2.0 Generic License

Punctuation, Part 2

In this blog post, I will be reviewing three more sections on Punctuation from Rules For Writers and then revising my draft of Project 2.

McLure, Darin (2011) "Punctuation Saves Lives!" via Flickr
Attribution 2.0 Generic License

1. "The comma"
Although I expected this section to be quite basic, it was surprisingly helpful. To me, the most useful advice was, "use a comma before a coordinating conjunction joining independent clauses." (Rules For Writers, 292). The example in the book was: "the department sponsored a seminar on college survival skills, and it also hosted a barbecue for new students." (Rules For Writers, 292). I realized that when I write sentences like this, I almost always forget the comma. 

After reading this section and then reviewing my own writing, I found this example from my Project 2 draft: "Her ability to appeal to the values of her audience, provide simple solutions to the clear failures of ethics, and create a strong credible foundation for herself and her argument, are the guiding forces in what makes her article so successful." The comma that is in red was not there before I revised my draft and is necessary according to the comma section. 

2. "The apostrophe"
I have always had trouble knowing when and how to use apostrophes, particularly when the word that you want to show possession already ends in "s". This section was really helpful for me. The most useful advice was, "1. If the noun does not end in -s, add -'s" and "2. If the noun is singular and ends in -s or and s sound, add -'s to indicate possession." (Rules For Writers, 322). The two examples from this section were: "Lois's sister spent last year in India" and "Her article presents an overview of Marx's teachings." (Rules For Writers, 322). 

After reading this section and then reviewing my own writing, I found this example from my Project 2 draft: "I will prove how Powell does this explicitly by manipulating word-choice and tone, calling attention to simple solutions of these failures, and reinforcing the audience’s rightful expectations concerning ethics in journalism by making several references to the SPJ Code of Ethics." Before, I had put the apostrophe on the outside of the s. I'm not exactly sure why I did that, but anyway, it's fixed now!

3. "End punctuation"
For this particular project, the most useful advice in this section was on "the period". The most useful advice was, "If a sentence reports a question instead of asking it directly, it should end with a period, not a question mark." (Rules For Writers, 333). The example from the book was: "The professor asked whether talk therapy was more beneficial than antidepressants?." In the example, the sentence should end with only a period. 

After reading this section and then reviewing my own writing, I found this example from my Project 2 draft: "Powell poses the question of how media ethics have become worse over the last few years?." This should end with a period according to the "end punctuation" section. Instead of simply correcting this sentence in my conclusion, I completely removed it.