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!

 



Rhetorical Analysis: Social Media

For those who write frequently, it is well known that the sharpest dagger (Don't worry! Metaphorical dagger!) that a writer owns is rhetoric. How something is written has a major impact on the reader and their interpretation of what was written. For example, in the blog post titled "Social Media: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," the author, called sternerr, talks about the dangers of social media. Their argument appeals to ethos at the beginning when they explains both sides of the argument. The author explains that social media websites can be beneficial in keeping up easily with loved ones, but there are some negative implications as well. The author then goes on to incite logos. They give specific examples of how teens much like the intended audience of their blog need to be careful with what they put of Facebook and Twitter. For example, she recall a story about a college student at UCLA who was forced to withdraw from school after a particular rant on a social media website. Her use of such a grave example makes readers believe that they can get in much more trouble or their posts than they thought. By scaring the reader with examples such as these, the author forms an impression in the mind of the reader and conveys their opinion successfully.

Another blog post, titled "Why Sharing Photos on Facebook is Bad for You," warns readers about the legal implications that their social media can have on their lives and their privacy. This article appeals mainly to logos as the author takes the reader through the process of reading the privacy policy on Facebook's website regarding pictures. The author includes screenshots of the policy itself to show the reader the truth behind his argument.  He then explains the policy to the reader and shows them what Facebook has the legal right to do with their pictures and videos that they had previously shared freely. Offering cold, and a little bit scary, evidence to support his claim allows the author to fully make his point to the reader.

These uses of rhetoric and are important tools that authors implement to make their points while writing. In highly opinionated pieces, the rhetoric is almost flagrant. Any other interesting examples of rhetoric out there? Please share!

Americans take pride in their culture. Baseball, mom and apple pie have been staples in American culture for much of its history. The emphasis on freedom and patriotism has lead many people in the United States that their country is "the best." But culture is a constantly evolving thing, and I believe that technology is the driving force behind that change. Now I'm not saying that The United States is no longer "the best," but I am saying that with the advent of different technologies the culture of The United States is beginning to blur with that of the rest of the world. This would make every one "the best!"

Technology has connected people in ways that were never before possible. For example, right now I can, (if I really wanted to prove my point!), go online and find friends in countries in Europe, Asia and Africa. I can also go online and find music, art and recipes from all over the world. Any person with access to the Internet also has access to the cultures of every person around the world. It is because of this connectivity that culture no longer has geographic limitations. the cultures of the world are beginning to blend into one world culture.

There are some who oppose the change that technology brings. Some people are repulsed by how more and more children play with video games and mp3 players than with jump ropes or hopscotch. Other people believe that our reliance on technology makes human beings lazy and stupid. (Is Technology Ruining Society?). They may be right in their beliefs. In American culture, obesity is a growing problem, and social networking is growing out of control. However, change is a natural part of cultural development, and I believe that this is positive growth.

The abilities that technology provides give us clear windows into the lives of others around the world. Young people in countries all over the world listen to the same music, play the same video games and watch the same movies. This generation of people raised with technology gives me hope that one day, the lines between borders will not be drawn so boldly. And that we will no longer be separated by simple things like where we were born.

Hey guys! I'm a long time reader, first time poster. I'm here to talk about culture. About what it is, and what it is not. Feel free to comment, discussion is highly encouraged!

Culture can be described in many ways, depending on who you ask. Some people, the "fancy" ones, will quote Shakespeare and show you pictures of great works of art, language and architecture. Others will simply point at the children across the street on their way to school. And some people will give you the rundown on what the Kardashians did yesterday. These are examples of what many people may describe as culture, and they do so within there rights. Who are we to gainsay this hypothetical stranger who is raving about Twilight in response to your questions about culture?

I believe that all of these responses are accurate examples of culture, (Despite the Kardashian Twilight thing...). Aime Cesaire, a famous french poet and politician, once said "Culture is everything. Culture is the way we dress, the way we carry our heads, the way we walk, the way we tie our ties--it is not only the fact of writing books or building houses." This description parallels my belief about the definition of culture. Culture is the backbone of our society, and therefore lives in everything we do every day.

To be "cultured" has nothing to do with how much Macbeth you remember from school, or how many composers you can name, or how good you are at cooking. That narrow-minded aristocrat malarkey has no place in this blog. To be cultured, one needs only to immersed in their lives and the lives of others. This is almost a default setting for most people. Because culture lives in our thoughts and actions, everyone is cultured.