Pictured below is an image that defines the topic of a research paper I am currently writing. The purpose of my research is to determine whether social networking sites such as Facebook do more harm than good for children. Cyber bullying is a growing problem in American schools today as more and more children are given free access to the Internet and social networking sites. As more and more children become more familiar, and more comfortable with these online tools, malicious and careless use of these tools becomes more and more commonplace.

The picture depicts a status update, presumably of a high school student, from the popular site "Facebook", that appears to target another student in an attempt to make them feel bad. Rhetorically, the image is a powerful one. Anyone who is familiar with Facebook understands that when this post is published, it is available for all too see. It is, therefore, implied that the purpose of the post was not simply to inform everyone that there would be a party, but to publicly humiliate and exclude a certain individual. It is in this way that the image invokes pathos in the viewer. Appalled at the insidious attempt to humiliate another student creates strong negative feeling towards the author of the post. The image also displays a sense of ethos, because this post is one that is very likely to be written frequently by many children across the country. The credibility, and likelihood of this post's existence, is compounded by the fact that the image appears to be a snapshot of an actual post on an actual computer screen. This implies a level of reality that viewers may have been previously unaware of.

 

This image is an excellent example of static visual rhetoric pertaining to cyber-bullying using social networking sites because it invokes a strong aversion, and because it is banal enough to seem very real.

Journal of Interpersonal, Intercultural, and Mass Communication

Hyper-linked above is a scholarly article concerning a study done on college age students about the implications and effects of social networking sites (such as Facebook and Twitter) on their daily lives. Specifically, the study looks at the effect on academic performance and communication skills.

I determined that the article is scholarly by reviewing the content an the layout of the piece. The layout of the article is easy to read and scientifically laid out. It begins with an abstract about the content of the study it is about to discuss, and it ends with a conclusion of the results. By examining the content of the article, you can tel it is scholarly by noting that it is objective in its claims. The article states an objective for a study by asking several thought provoking research questions, then goes on to discuss the method for carrying out the study, and finally ends by summing up the results in a concise and objective manner. A less scholarly article would have been polluted by the personal opinion of the author. By remaining objective, the article is rhetorically academic.

The article begins by designing an experiment to shed light on the impact of social networkiong sites on the daily lives of college age students. This was done by taking a survey of a large sample of college age students at a university and polling their opinion of the effect of social networking on their lives. Questions included things such as whether or not social networking has an effect on academic performance or communication skills. Once the set up is complete, the article displays and summarizes the results of the test.

The study concluded that there were correlations between the usage rates of social networking sites and young person factors such as academic performance, communication skills, and ability to search for a date.

Overall, this article rhetorically provides a detailed analysis of the effects of social networking and allows the reader to understand more thoroughly the trends that are occurring due to increased social networking use among young people.

While attending a university, it is hard not to identify one's self with the major that one is studying, and the career that they wish to pursue when out of college. I am currently an electrical engineering major at Texas A&M University, and all I do every day is math, science, and design. So, naturally, a dominant part of my personality is involved with the numbers I happen to be crunching and the physics behind our everyday lives. But there is certainly much more that defines me, and everyone else, than the job that I wish to acquire out of school.

This is an effect that, I believe, comes from the American culture. Our whole lives we are asked what "we want to be when we grow up?" As if our growth, as people, suddenly comes to a halt when we evolve into our final form and choose a career. When John Doe is introduced to some new friends at a barbecue two things come out first and foremost: Name and Rank (meaning career). This is almost equivalent to being assigned a binary identification number in lieu of a name. Whoever has a bigger number is more successful in life. Never mind that John is an excellent cook. Never mind that he enjoys sailing, or that he has a beautiful wife and a cat named Bubbles.

Americans place too much value on career and wealth. Success should not be defined based on income, but should vary from person to person. The "Protestant Work Ethic" is a relic from an old world. Things are different now.

What is your opinion on the identity crisis that currently grips the nation? Love to hear your side!

As technology advances, and more people use their electronics and social sites to connect, people spend less time with other people. As a result, the time that we actually spend interacting with people is spent with only close friends and family, and people who fall outside that circle are shunted to a lower tier of priority. In our culture, we treat strangers with special type of behavior. We hold open doors, push elevator buttons for each other, and give the occasional nod in passing, but anything beyond that requires an extra effort that is reserved for acquaintances, and friends. Only when it's convenient do we help a stranger in need, never going out of our way.

A while back, I was tasked with picking up some medicine for my little brother (10 years old). He was diagnosed early in his life with a disease that requires daily treatment. About two weeks ago, my brother ran out of his medicine. My parents asked me to pick up his prescription at our local pharmacy (which will not be named). I drove down to the pharmacy and perused to selection of candy and drinks as I made my way back to the pharmacy section. When I arrived, I was met by a... I guess they should be called pharmacists. When I told the pharmacist that I was here to pick up my order, she went through her computer to complete my request. I began to be wary because it was taking longer than usual to find the order. My suspicions were confirmed when I saw the troubled look on her face. She informed me that our insurance wouldn't pay for the medicine until  tomorrow, and asked me to come back then. I shrugged and went home.

When I came back the next day, the need for the medicine was even more dire. When my brother does not have his medicine, his health rapidly declines. The same lady was working the counter. She went through the same process as before, and informed me that the insurance would not pay for it until tomorrow. I told her that she had told me the same thing yesterday, but she said she couldn't give it to me until tomorrow. My brother health declined again over the next 24 hours.

The next morning I went back, and asked for the medicine. She rummaged around in her computer and finally came out with a different result. The insurance would finally pay for the medicine. I was very pleased, and even more annoyed. She bustled back into her collection over drugs and did not come back for some time. When she finally did come back, she said that they were out of that particular drug, and that she would have to order it. She said that it would be ready in one week. My blood boiled at this statement, but somehow I was able to stifle myself enough to allow only a hint of malice slip through my teeth. I told her "Don't worry about it. "My brother will be dead by then." I said. "Thank you for all your help."

I went to another pharmacy that afternoon and got the drugs I needed. After a few calls to the insurance company, we found out that we could have had the medicine the same day we asked for it. Instead of calling our insurance company to clear the drugs, and instead of ordering the drugs to be ready, she simply kept putting me off while my brother got more and more sick.

We need to take a close look at how we treat people who we don't know. I the current trend continues, then even I won't want to socialize outside of the internet, because of the harshness I would face otherwise.

Growing up with my parents in the American southwest, I was born and raised to speak English. But I also had exposure to another language. When I would visit my papou (grandfather), he would try to teach me Greek. He would tell me Greek stories, and try to teach me the meanings of Greek words, and show me how English words also come from Greek meanings. After several such visits, I was intrigued by the new and special language of my ancestors. I asked my father if he would allow me to take classes in Greek, or if he would buy me software that would help me learn. He would not allow it. He said that if I wanted to learn another language, it should be Spanish, because it would be much more useful to me later in life. I argued with him, but to no avail. I was determined, however, to lean Greek despite my father's reaction. I reasoned that I could take it in high school if I waited a couple years. So I did. But when the time came to register for classes, I discovered there were very limited options for languages at my high school. Either Spanish or French. Defeated, I took Spanish, because it would be "more useful." I excelled at Spanish without any difficulty, but I wish I could have learned Greek. This made me feel restricted. This restriction shows the importance of literacy. To be able to pursue the intellectual avenues that I desire is a freedom that I was denied when I was a child. I hope to pick up Greek someday soon, but for now, I am forced to stick to more practical matters.

What does it mean to be literate? Some people might say that you are literate if you know how to read and write, but that's not telling the whole story, is it? Being literate means having developed the ability to interpret the thoughts, feelings and sensations of others and to be able to create some of your own.

Like I have mentioned in previous posts, culture lives in everything we do. It is a fundamental aspect of who we are, but culture as we know it would not exist today if it weren't for literacy. If the cave men thousands of years ago had never written anything on the walls, ideas would not have spread, stories would remain trapped in the imagination of the storyteller, and our cherished culture would be fragmented and isolated. Literacy is the evolution of culture. Each time a new person becomes literate, the culture of the world changes only slightly, but it changes forever.

Young children feel the fullness of life, just as we all do (and perhaps a little more), but they cannot understand what these sensations mean, and they cannot actively relay their thoughts to others, and they cannot not fully contribute to culture. But when they learn to interpret the world around them, and how to paint their own walls, they change not only their culture, but the culture of those they influence. And as each generation passes through this gateway, the culture of the evolves into the future.

What are your thoughts on literacy? Do you have a different interpretation? Please comment!

Stories have always been a great way for people to connect. Throughout history, people have passed down stories from generation to generation. As we hear these stories passed down, it is interesting to hear how the stories evolve as they are told by different people.

For example, there is a story in my family that has been told for a long time now. It involves my great great grandfather in Greece. My Papou (grandpa) tells the story like this:

     A long time ago in Greece, our family name was Kanellis, and my great great grandfather was a great big hairy man. He was so hairy, that he looked like a bear, and his friends called him, ironically, Spanos. Spanos means 'clean shaven' or 'hairless'. He eventually got so used to the name that he changed it legally to Spanos, and now our family name is Spanos.

 

Papou tells the story truthfully, but it is not the same as when my Yaya (grandma) tells the same story. Yaya is a much better storyteller than Papou, so when Yaya tells the story, she explains everything in much greater detail. She describes the house that my great grandfather lived in, and the names of all his friends who joked with him. She even made sure to explain all the Greek to me. "Kanellis is a name for someone with cinnamon colored hair" she would say. Between the both of them, I learned the same story, but each of them told it in their own way. My Papou is a tough man of few words, and when he does speak, he speaks mostly Greek. While Yaya is a creative and gentle soul, who loves to entertain her grandchildren. Their versions of the story reflect their personalities and the way they connect with people. Do you have any examples of stories that are different when told by different people? Please share!