Self-Critique

I believe that my best blog posts were about open writing and criticism. I feel that they were my best simply because I felt passionate about my opinion and I guess my emotion or mood was my drive. I was a bit angry as I wrote those blogs because I had a target. They were both about awful and rude critics or people who make unnecessary comments about a subject matter. What I learn from these two blog posts is that having a strong drive on a topic can help in writing a meaningful statement. I mean you would not make a good argument if you argue over a topic that does not interest you or something you are not even passionate about. I also learn that if you have a problem with someone's statement, something that you do not agree with, you should respond to them in a courteous manner. If you show respect as you are telling the writer what you do not agree with then chances are you will be able to defend your reasoning better or learn something from it. Because if you end up angry and start becoming rude then things will escalate to unnecessary comments, like name calling and you may end up looking really stupid. So what I learn was to write with passion but make should all of your words come out of respect and nothing rude.

A blog post of mine that I did not think was so great was my preliminary essay post. If was a bit difficult since that post was basically my outline of my research paper. Well the main difficulty was finding information on my topic. During one of our class sessions, I realized that I had picked a pretty hard topic, which was on science and creationism. But I managed to learn a lot on each side. Plus I had to ask for an extension for this paper. The main reason that I do not like this post is probably because it brings back memories of me being stressed out over the research paper. Ironically, I did pretty well on the paper, so overall, I just do not like the stress! I have learn from my teacher that I should prioritize my work better by doing the most important work first then on to the lesser important work.

I can honestly say that my relationship with writing publicly has changed, I feel that it is relieving to write out your opinion. And I am not a big fan of writing either. But with these blog posts, it is as if everyone has a voice and a chance to share their view points. These blogs have made it more comfortable for me write out in the open for people to see. Mainly because I came to a realization that, in online public writing, everyone has the equality to write whatever and should not be mistreated in anyway. Overall, I did enjoy writing some of these blogs because they were mostly opinionated, and I am glad to be able to write about how I feel about a topic rather than analyzing someone else's opinion. Well even though I enjoyed writing some of them, I am more glad that they are done with! Merry Christmas!

Annotated Bibliography

I have chosen to respond to Amira Said's "Fame through YouTube" for my essay topic.


Slutsky, Irina. "MEET YOUTUBE'S MOST IN-DEMAND BRAND STARS." Advertising Age 81.32 (2010): 8. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 7 Dec. 2010.

I believe that this source will help me in explaining that there is more to YouTube than ordinary people getting famous. Yes Ordinary people may get famous but others who get famous may be trying to make a living out of it. There are some YouTube stars who only make videos and have no other jobs. And so they must work even harder and how they get paid depends on their audience. This article goes in depth of how popular stars on YouTube are endorsed and how major corporations market their product(s) by working with these stars. What corporations may do is have the YouTube star in their advertisements, and how the corporations pick their star depends on how popular the star is with the audience (like the number of views per YouTube video).


Bounchareune, Julie. "Wong Fu Raises Awareness of Asian-American Stereotypes." Collegian (2010): 1-6. Web. 7 Dec 2010. <http://collegian.csufresno.edu/2010/05/10/wong-fu-raises-awareness-of-asian-american-stereotypes/>.

Another point that I would like to make is that YouTube has the power to change the perspective of people. Take diversity and stereotypes for example, this article will help me clarify about how a race can change their stereotypes. This article is about three Asian-Americans who have become popular and role models through making short videos or movies. They are known as Wong Fu Productions. They have broken many barriers in their community and throughout the world by overcoming stereotypes. They have stated that throughout the media, Asians-Americans are often portrayed as martial artists, math geniuses or imported car racers. In their videos, they star Asian-Americans with a different persona or part other than what was was stated above. It's to show that Asian-Americans can be more than what the public stereotypes them to be. This shows that YouTube can be a stepping stone to ending stereotypes.


Wade, Rochard. "The Benefits Of Using YouTube." Ubscure Article Directory 1-4. Web. 7 Dec 2010. <http://www.ubscure.com/Art/147037/10/The-Benefits-Of-Using-YouTube.html>.

Another argument that I would like to make is over how Ms. Said wrote that becoming a celebrity was much more difficult back then. I agree but there is a higher chance of discrimination from talent agencies or other corporations. They would automatically guess that the public would only want a White or African American to represent their products, and no other race should be celebrities. And who are they to say what the public wants and what they don't want, and that's why YouTube is great. It has the ability to give everyone a chance of stardom, it does not discriminate nor see what race is, just people. I mean even animals can become famous (I am talking about the many views that cats get, for some reason, probably because they so cute!) And not only people in America, but YouTube can expand to other countries, it can save agencies in looking for something that the audience wants. That's how it should be, the audience knows what they want, they do not need agencies or corporations for that!

Response Essay Blog

My response essay topic will be on Amira Said's preliminary essay: "Fame through YouTube". Ms. Said's primary argument in her essay is that it is easy for any ordinary person to be come famous, through posting homemade videos on YouTube, and that YouTube devalues fame, by making it accessible to just anyone. I, however, feel that it is difficult to become famous on YouTube. Even though it may be easier to share your videos, you still have to have something in your video that catches the audiences' attention. But before I go further, I would like to add that ordinary people have already become famous even without YouTube. Take William Hung for an example. He was just a contestant on the television program, American Idol. Anyone can have auditioned for American Idol, but it was up to the judges to see who would get to move up. Well Mr. Hung came up and sang, one of the judges was not pleased and did not allow him to move up. His singing was not the best, probably one of the worst. But he managed to catch people's attention, because his bad singing ended up being comical and funny to listen to. William Hung is now successful off of his bad singing, and before all this fame, he was just an ordinary engineer who sings bad. But now he's an engineer that sings bad that entertains people. And that's what fame is mainly about, the ability to entertain or gain people's interest. It is no good to use YouTube if you do not have the power to grasp the people's interest.

You do not necessarily need talent to be famous. What you really need is attention, if you get a lot of attention (say several million views on YouTube) then other corporations might what to market you and so they help you get your name out by selling products about you. So what I'm trying to say is that public attention outsells talent. But then again, who are we to say that people are talentless. Those who entertain people on YouTube may have a talent to entertaining people, by either means of being funny, or someone who can connect well with the public.

Another comment I would like to discuss is that even if you do get a lot of attention, chances are that it could just be a one time thing. Like Ms. Said's example with the little girl, Cody, who cried for her favorite star Justin Bieber. Yes, she may have gotten a bit famous and a chance to meet her favorite celebrity, but what happens if she cries for another celebrity that she is dying to meet. The probability of her succeeding a second time can be very low. Her audiences will just get bored, or even worst, bash on her for trying the same thing. Most YouTube celebrity may even work harder than non-famous YouTube stars. Those who become famous on YouTube usually depend on it for income and so they make videos regularly, and that takes a lot of creativity. So YouTube stars make videos weekly and have to come up with ideas to keep their audiences. What I'm trying to say at the end of all this is that creativity is definitely a talent!

Challenging Media

The video that I have chosen to refute in this blog post is Mickey Mouse Monopoly: Disney, Childhood & Corporate Power. One of the topics that this video discusses that I did not agree with was how they believe that Disney is shaping the children's imagination. I believe that history shapes how society should behaves not Disney, therefore Disney incorporates society's values into their movies. For example, Disney altered stories like Cinderella and The Little Mermaid, because the originals had culture values that were old-fashioned compared to today's culture. If Disney was truly in control, than they would have kept the original stories from the Grimm Brothers, which is far worst for teaching children values that would not be appropriate for this modern age. And not converting the story would save Disney a lot money. So this proves that Disney actually cares and bothers to make changes to their movies so that the movies would be more family friendly.

As for me, when I watched Disney movies, I did not think of anything about race or hidden messages. I was too into the story and wanted to see how the plot ended. I think that children back then watched Disney movies because the stories were just so captivating and interesting. The adult researchers that criticize Disney movies in this video were not children themselves while watching the movie. To me that is a big factor in questioning the researchers statement that Disney movies have negative messages for children. And to add, the little girls in the video seem like they were asked those types question about race; the little girls in this research video would not strike me as girls that would critically analyze a movie, but rather watch the movie to enjoy the plot, music and the characters.

Luckily, children of today are old enough to argue back and defend their childhood memories. Or course we will be defensive, you can even see it on the comments and the number of "dislikes" on that video. We are offended that people would try to ruin such an innocent thing. These researchers are very nit picky. They only see the cons, but the cons are definitely outweighed by the pros within Disney movies. One researcher interprets "Beauty and the Beast" as women giving in to angry men and that it was the women's job to find the goodness within angry people. She says that this is an unsafe message to teach young girls because it can put them in harms way of getting physically hurt. Well I can see what the researcher is getting at, but you can see it as being patient with others and that you should not fight back. I mean should Disney have Belle fight back? No, because that goes against what we teach our children about two wrongs not making a right. Plus Beast never physically hurt Belle and in the end Beast changed for Belle because he loved her so much. It was not just Belle, but Beast had to find it in himself to become a better person. And finally, one researcher's comment about Disney making women slim and more attractive was another concern. I do agree with this statement and Disney as been improving over this issue. But way back when, before Disney, that was how the stereotypical princess was viewed. I do not think that we should blame Disney for what society's past has promoted.

I can say that Disney movies have definitely changed through the years, and they are even better for children nowadays. My last comment that I will make is that if we ever want the media change, we ourselves must individually change the way we judge others in terms of stereotypes and other differences. The media follows values that are present in today's world.

Dissenting Voices: Pokemon

Something that I have read and did not agree with was a blog post about Pokemon. Pokemon is a children's television program that involves a young boy name Ash, journeying the world to catch creatures known as Pokemon. Pokemon are creatures that possess unique powers such as having the ability to control the elements and evolving to become stronger. Ash is on a journey to become the Pokemon master. The blog was trying to explain how Pokemon is evil or satanic. The author of this blog insists that Pokemon teaches children violence and encourages animal cruelty. He goes on to say that it is the work of Satan, that Satan is influencing children to become "evil". The author speaks about children becoming possessed by these "evil" Pokemon spirits. His example was that children were acting as if they were Pokemon themselves. I can honestly say that every children in their lifetime has played "pretend" before. Children have the tendency to pretend to be their idols or something that they are interested in.

The author goes in depth with how children become violent toward one another over the Pokemon card game, and that the card making companies only care about marketing and money. I do not agree because children will fight over any toy, regardless of what form the toy may be in. I mean toddlers fight all the time over toys like firetrucks. So does that mean that we should ban actual real firetrucks since the toys "promote" violence? I also think that it is unfair to generalizing that all kids will hurt one another over Pokemon. You rarely hear kids wreaking havoc over silly card games or t.v. shows. Companies market products that they think will get popular and that is exactly what they did. When children watch Pokemon it is obvious that they will want toys from that show, like for a keepsake or to own something that relates to the series to show that they are a fan.

I think that Pokemon is being attacked because it is so popular, which is understandable. Anything that becomes popular also becomes a threat. Certain groups of people feel uncomfortable when they see a fad becoming widely popular. They feel as if it will grow to the point where it will take over the world. What I mean by taking over the word is that the fad will have great influential power over it viewers. They get the notion that its viewers have been brainwash. In my eyes, it is nothing of the sort, kids watching the show are just interested, and just think about their favorite Pokemon and what kind of adventures that they would be having with their Pokemon. I also do not agree that it is an obsession that is out of control. Everyone has an obsession, this may be a bad comparison, but it is like having a crush on a girl/boy. You cannot stop thinking about the person, but does that mean that you are obsess and out of control? No, you can obsess a bit, but you would have to distinguish whether it or not it is a healthy obsession. And once again, we should not generalize one child's out of control behavior to every child in the world. It is not an unhealthy obsession if kids are also socializing with their friends about the show and who their favorite characters are. The children interact with each other by playing pretend, and in a way, it is getting the kids off the couch to be physically active.

And finally, it seems to me that the author of this blog does not research Pokemon well enough to see that the show teaches moral values. This show promotes companionship with the Pokemon and their trainers. In the show Ash has at countless times shown that he truly loves his Pokemon by taking care of them, letting them make there own choices and  has never used force or shout at his Pokemon. His Pokemon seem to care for him as much as he cares for them. I truly hope that the author of this blog will have a second opinion about Pokemon in the near future.

Online Interaction

So far, online interactions with my classmates have been going pretty well. It was hard at first because I had to get use to the transition. It was difficult at first since you can read the tone of any blog or comment differently. My problems with online interactions is that it does not have that emotional feel to it. The tone of comments are not definite. Whereas, in class you can get a better understanding of how your classmates feel about a certain issue. Another problem with online interaction is timing. Once you leave a comment on a discussion forum, you are not sure when your peers will comment back or how long you will wait, and vice-versa for your classmates. But if you are in class, you will get an answer quicker and your teacher is also there to help you. It is also easier to procrastinate if you are doing work online. You will feel as if you can do the work anytime, just as long as you do it before the deadline. So comments or interactions may come really late, however, if you are in class, you are given a set amount of time to interact. I guess being told what to do is best in this situation, but it is obvious that teachers would have to tell students what to do because no one likes to do what they do not want to do. My final concern is that it is easier to forget your assignments if you are not reminded, well not paper assignments, but assignments that involve interacting online with your classmates. Overall, I do like online interactions with my classmates.

What I like about online interactions with my classmates is that I do not have to go to class. You can choose to work anywhere you want at almost anytime. You can also proofread your blog and comments, you also get a chance to think of great comment or reply. The perks of being in class is that you can get your questions answered faster, but for the person providing the answer, it may be more difficult since they would have to think of it right away. So the perks of online interactions would be not having to provide an answer right away. Even though you may have to wait for a reply longer than you would in class, the time in between your comments and classmate's replies you can multi-task, like work on other homework assignments. Or you can listen to music as you are typing your blog or waiting for your classmates to reply. You can even watch a movie! I guess my point is that you can do whatever you want just so long as you are participating on the forums or typing your blog.

I love this hybrid class and I have recommended it for most of my peers to take it next semester. Mainly because you only have to go once a week and that teaches you to be more self-reliant. I mean as of now I am a bit behind on my work, but it is the consequences I deserve for procrastinating. I will admit that this is a problem for me but I feel it is a great way for me to learn how to prioritize my life. To me, failure is another chance to succeed.

Learning From Past Experiences

Depending on the situation I am in, I can tell whether or not that i have learned from my experiences. It also depends on my state of mind, my mood or how I'm feeling. Because I feel that it is a challenge for anybody to learn from an experience when they are annoyed, angry or just tired. It's best to be cleared minded and focus when you are trying to take what you gained from an experience to heart. Another factor that can determine how much you can get out of an experience is who or what you learn it from. It's a lot easier to accept that you learned something from people who you can tolerate and enjoy being around with versus people who you don't get along with. I mean you can learn from people who you aren't fond of, but you would conceal the fact that the person you dislike actually taught you something. Or you can learn from other people's mistakes, and it's more accepting when you learn a lesson from the person you don't like. Because you witness the person, who you can't stand, slip-up. This may also include people who you don't know. If you see someone mess up, you say to yourself "I'm glad that's not me" or "I'm not doing that". I believe that you can also learn from an experience unknowingly. A great example of this is anything dealing with trial and error. For instances, you are given three different colored boxes. In one of them contains a coin. You go through and open each box, the ones that don't have the coin, you know that you'll have to avoid those colored box. You based your pick on the right box by eliminating the boxes that you have already looked through. Trial and error can also apply to those who are practicing techniques on certain physical exercises. Similar to gymnasts training on their flips and handstands. They repeat the technique until they get a sense of balance and trust for their body. And in no time they are able to perfect their performance.

As for me and how I learn from experiences, well there's a mix of learning from my own experience and learning from others. I can remember learning from other people better than remembering what I learn on my own. Aside from that, whenever I acquire a new skill or idea, my view of the world changes. I believe that in life change in one's self is inevitable. You are who you are through what you experience. So I don't see that it is a concern if learning is transformative or that beliefs may be altered. You learn what feels write to you and if you don't agree you do research until you are right or until you are totally convince of whatever the answer may be. I also think that everyone has a unique way of learning lessons, or that's what everyone wants to believe. Nobody wants to learn a life-changing lesson the same way as another, they want learn it in an exceptional way. And so I judge others of how they learn differently than myself. However, I view that learning involving logic is different. To me logic is step by step and there is usually only one way to arrive to an answer. So yeah, there are somethings that I can talk to others about and somethings that I can't.

A Stereotypical News Article

Martin Robbins' article was pretty amusing to read. I did see some resemblance between Robbins' article and other articles that I have read from my past years. It didn't really resemble any of my articles that I chose for my paper. But I thought for sure that it would have been more similar to my popular article ("How Earthquakes Work") and less like my scholarly one ("Mapping Tectonic Stress Using Earthquakes"). My popular article was more in depth with the information that it gave. And it gave it in a way where it was easy to understand. I mean my popular article did not fluff the ideas of the topic. The tone of "How Earthquakes Work" seem pretty scholarly, because it didn't get off topic and it was straightforward. It differs from "Mapping Tectonic Stress Using Earthquakes" through it's terminology and less complicated examples. The main thing that I have notice between my popular article and the stereotypical layout were the pictures. Robbins wrote "At this point I will include a picture, because our search engine optimization experts have determined that humans are incapable of reading more than 400 words without one", I found it hilarious because it definitely is common for many popular articles to do that. My popular article had, at most, 400 words before every picture or video. But the pictures did help me visualize the devastation that an earthquake can cause. Especially the videos, they give the audience a visual of what the article is explaining.

And there was hardly any citing or quoting within "How Earthquakes Work". They reach their intended audience through a simplification words and short breaks in between every few sentences. It is clear that the audience that the author was aiming for were those who needed quick information on earthquakes, and for those who have an interest and want to know the gist of earthquakes. Overall, I do agree with Robbins statement about the layout of popular articles.

The Scholarly V.S. The Popular

The topic that I have chosen for my second paper is earthquakes. Earthquakes are related to the field of geology which is categorized under natural sciences. I picked this topic because I am already taking geology as a science. It is also one of my potential majors, so I thought that I should do a research paper relating to it to explore my interest. For this project, I am to pick one scholarly article and one popular article. The idea is to compare the two articles, make connections and to point out any key differences. Differences such as audience, formatting style and context.

The content of my scholarly article revolves around statistics and how to determine the location and size of earthquakes using mathematical equations. Since nature is hard to predict, I would say that they are more likely to be calculations than accurate measurements. My reasoning is that this article is embedded with many equations. The equations are pretty constant which shows that they are using certain algorithms to measure earthquakes. Nature has many accounting variables for it to be easy to predict. Aside from formulas, this article includes figures and explanations with complex contexts. The link to my scholarly article that I chose: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=1&hid=106&sid=495abcfb-af63-4799-87a0-f78f91ab0347%40sessionmgr113
And here is the link to my popular article as well: http://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/natural-disasters/earthquake5.htm This article is quite different from the scholarly one. I found this article on Google whereas I found the other on a school trusted database. Their formatting is very different from one another. The popular article is more organized and the context is easier to follow. It talks about the basics and leads you into an more in depth study. Basically it is information for people who have no knowledge of earthquakes but have somewhat of an interest in it.

Concerns that I have for typing this paper is my outline. I really don't know how I would start my paper and I need to work on my transitions. Especially if I am going back and forth on my articles. But the first challenge is to get the hang of APA citation, so I must correctly format my title before I can even begin to type my paper. My next concern is to find connections between the two articles. I feel as if they are too completely different to find similarities. My reasoning is that the scholarly article goes way too in depth while the popular article gives its readers many segments and key points on the topic. And I have already mentioned that transitions are not my forte, so putting the paper together would be another major concern. Despite all of these existing problems, I still feel confident that I'll type a great paper. My plan is to introduce each article and to briefly summarize them. Then I would compare the articles in terms of context, formatting, audience and any other dissimilarities that I may find. I would go on with any bits of similarities that they may have, since that could be the weakest part of my paper. And finally end with a conclusion that gives out the key points of my paper. I may have to outline my paper with the information from the articles first. So I can decide which is my strongest identification. I want to type from my strongest point to my weakest. Well that's how I plan on starting, but I'm hoping that Ms. Clark would be available to give out more advise. Well anyway, here I go.

References:

Arnold, R., Townend, J., & Vignaux, T. (2005, November 23). Mapping Tectonic Stress Using Earthquakes. AIP Conference Proceedings, 803(1), 475-482. doi:10.1063/1.2149828. 2, October 2010.

Harris, T. (2001, January 16). How Earthquakes Work. HowStuffWorks.com. http://science.howstuffworks.com/nature/natural-disasters/earthquakes.htm 2, October 2010.

Discussion Forum

I did not really participate in the discussion. I only left one comment and it was just a reply to one of my classmate's comment. Mainly because it was a bit confusing at first but once I got used to reading the comment, I could not think much to say. Other than that, the forum did seem useful. In my perspective you could read what others had to say and to either argue or support what you read. It was difficult at first since it was new kind of way to communicate with physically being in class. And the fact that this English 101 class is a hybrid class made it a bit more challenging. At first I was really for the idea, but as the time came I was flustering quite a lot. I had forgotten about it for an instant then came to check online. I felt a bit lost and that I arrived too late, so I felt less motivated to post comments and to reply. My plan was to get on the forum and be one of the first to comment. Then as the wall builds up with comments, I can slowly read all of the posts. So I can stay on top of the subject with each update from my classmates' posts. But I got home late from dinner and as I logged on, there so many comments that were already posted and it was hard to reply to each. Like for an example, how do you reply to a person's reply of another's comment. Eventually I got use to it, but by then I felt that it was too late, and that nobody wanted to continue the discussion anymore.

I am definitely in favor of more discussion forums, but not too many. Just enough for us to get the hang of how to use the forum format. I am also in favor of another one because I want another chance to redeem myself for failing my first one. Even though I commented on someone else's opinion, I felt that my comment was weak and not as complex as my other classmates. I know that I am to blame for not being on time to join my peers on the discussions and that I cannot just make excuses. But I am hoping for another one so that I'll have second chance at it, plus I feel that I'll be better prepared.

And to be honest, I am posting this blog way too late. One of my reason for this is that I've been trying to figure out the right words to explain that I was lost and not motivated enough to read all of those posts. And that's one of the reasons why I didn't like the discussion forums. If there's too much to read, I feel no desire to go through them all to reply to them. I know I must since that is my job as a college student. I must be more dedicated to any work that's given to me. But all and all, I do feel that I am slowly growing into that phase of dedication. I just hope that I don't procrastinate too much.

Conversations, Who to Listen

The problem that Mark Liberman addresses in his "We Need More Bad Science Writers" article is the reliability of the media. He summarizes a newspaper article about omega-3 fish oil supplements, and how supposedly healthy they are for children of ages eight through twelve. The writer of that article is Denis Campbell. His article stated that fish oil enhances the focus schoolchildren. He wrote the article without any support or knowledgeable references. And so Liberman did some research and questions why Campbell isn't fired from his job. What Liberman discovered was that hardly any scientist has ever tested whether or not fish oil really did help schoolchildren concentrate more. Any tests that were made reported that there was not much change in a child's focus while taking an omega-3 fish oil supplement.

It's infuriating to think that such a reliable source of information could be so false, especially on a serious topic such as science. That was the first message that I got from Liberman. I'm well aware that newspapers have lied before. Back then they lied for the purpose of selling their story and to get the public's attention, so then people will continue reading their news. Nowadays, the news topic is more accurate but sometimes they come with a misleading title. The news' headliner choices relate to the article, but it's mainly there to protect their story from sounding boring. Like for example, when I read a headliner on Yahoo.com, it catches my interest and so I click on the web-link. And most of the time, after I read the article I wonder to myself: "Why did I just wasted my time reading this article". And now, after reading Liberman's article, I feel a bit more concern about what I read in magazines and even, perhaps, the newspapers.

Liberman's evidence that supports his article is Ben Goldacre. A writer that published an article that refuted Campbell's information on fish oil supplements. It was mainly effective because Goldacre and Campbell were from the same publishing company. It shows that their company is willing to re-examine their articles and to fix any problems that arises. More importantly, it also shows that the company is willing to admit when they are wrong. However, there are some problems with Liberman's article. The only valid creditability that he has is Goldacre's article. What if Goldacre is wrong as well? Then both Liberman and Goldacre's statements are invalid, thus proving that Campbell was correct in his writing. But the most vital setback in Liberman's article is his research of the actual scientific study. I could not find a reference or anything that was cited about this research. It's ironic that I am doubting Liberman's article since his article is about doubting other articles.

And finally, I don't agree with what Liberman said about having more bad science writers is a good thing. Science is about discovery that may involve trial and error. It shouldn't have to be error, potential error and doubt. If there well more bad science writers, it would cause us all to question our discoveries. Therefore my suggestion his to have better editors before a story is published. The company's editors should do research of his own about the story and ask the writers about their preferences. So at the end of the day, prevention is the best solution of any problem.

The Power of Open Writing!

The consequences of writing openly online is very little. Nowadays you can see posts that bad mouth just about anything. Take "YouTube" videos for example. We go look up a music video that we thought was just the best thing ever and think, how can anybody hate it, right? Well under the videos you can be sure to find at least one person that will just bad mouth it. For me, if I'm watching an awesome video and I see someone just thrashing the video, I just think that they're trying to hard to be different from everyone else, just to stand out. I mean why else would anyone just take their time to find the video and say bad things about it. Okay sure you can say that another video lead you to this "crappy" one, but why would you still stay there just to create arguments. I mean if I see a video that I don't like, I just move on to find another that's within my taste. I also get that corporations want feedback from their audience as well, but that's why there are "likes" and "dislike" buttons right? Plus you can always express your negative feedbacks in a courteous way.

As you have just read from my rant, there are very consequence in writing online. Like people can question me for going off topic, why do I complain so much or just about anything. No one can really stop you from writing what you want to write online. Nonetheless, there are very powerful benefits for writing online. Your writing can change other people's opinion about how they think on a certain topic. I mean the point is to look from other people's perspective and to make you more knowledgeable. But the most amazing thing about writing openly online is the power to express yourself. As I was typing away in my blog, I had this great feeling of being able to write how I truly felt about any topic. And as a bonus I got to read some of my classmate's blog and also receive their feedback. It was like an intellectual way to socialize online.

I truly believe that we are taking full advantage of online writing, perhaps too far. I mean there is a point where people can get too far on what they say. They start creating pointless arguments; isn't there enough conflict in the world to be making more? Well those are the people who don't deserve this power of writing freely online. I can't deny them of their right to write freely, but I sure as hell can ignore them! It's like this quote from an awesome superhero's uncle "With great power comes great responsibilities" (Spider-man). It's our responsibility to be smart on how we write and how we approach an article. No matter how angry a topic gets us, we must overcome it to be able to argue back. That's why I try my best to reply back with courtesy, even if I'm super mad! I hope those of you who read this will be able to understand and to remember to treat others like humans.

Criticism

Criticism is disapproval expressed by pointing out the flaws of works. And by works I mean anything that's an idea. I know for a fact that I am not good at offering criticism because when I read paper, I tend to read in an optimistic tone. My tone can change if I see that the author has changed his or her tone by thrashing an idea. I carefully analyze what the writer is thrashing about. Generally I hate the idea of critics attacking a work in an unnecessary tone, or just plain bad mouthing. I see that the best way to get your point across is to write back in a gentle tone. That way people who read your reply can read it calmly and see your idea clearly, versus you writing back in an angry tone. If you're criticizing in a disrespectful matter then it'll just cause more tension and anger. You and who you were criticizing will just reply back and forth furiously. And when you write angrily, you start to lose yourself which can lead to you forgetting your point. You may end up not making a point at all and start writing foolishly, because that's just the nature of our anger. Well that's why I choose to read in an optimistic attitude, that way I can reply back and make my point clear.

To be honest, I don't really know what good constructive criticism looks like, mainly because I don't give them out on a daily basis. I also don't like criticism of other people's hard work. I mean it's okay if I'm criticized, but to a certain extent. I would prefer someone to point out my flaws in a courteous matter because to me that just shows respect. But recently, I have seen many works of talent and beauty that are harshly criticized. Somehow there are people out there who are able to find something ugly out of something so beautiful. Like for an example, the movie James Cameron's "Avatar" was a bit hit. But somehow, a few critics manage to find some flaws within the movie like racism. They claim that it was racism because the movie seem to "target" Native Americans. But I saw it as embracing a culture with interest. It made me felt like I wanted to know more about their culture by doing some research. I guess you can always find the good and bad in just about any idea. And I'm not saying it's not possible to find ugly out of beauty, I'm just stating that there are other civil ways of pointing it out.

Base on what I know, I am sure that I can produce a decent criticism. But I'll do it in a way that shows respect that way the author can read my feedback and write back either thanking me or telling that me feedback was unnecessary. And I know for a fact that he or she will write back with an intelligent response. That way I could learn more techniques to improve my writing instead of techniques on how to make witty comebacks. And personality, the best critique that someone can give me is just about anything. I know that I have many flaws but I can't pick one that's "best" or that I'm not understanding what I'm being asked. Well I just hope that I can help my classmates get the best grades on their essays. Good luck to them all!

Bad Drafts are Best!

I was so pleased after reading Anne Lamott's "Shitty First Drafts". It made me feel comfortable to write wherever the heck I want, without the restrictions of my "perfectionism". I totally loved how she shares that we all believe that our favorite authors write perfectly. I truly believe, even after reading this article, that my favorite writer was just perfect. Like for an example, my favorite poet is John Keats and after reading his poems I can only imagine that all he has to do is just sit down and write his poem nonchalantly. But if I try really hard, I can only imagine him hesitating for a moment but then continues on. I mean the thought of John Keats crumpling up papers of his "shitty" drafts was just impossible!
I also loved how Lamott wrote about her writing process. I felt like someone understood me, because I too freak out when nothing is coming to mind as I write my essay. And I get the notion that everyone is doing so well that they are beyond the point of stress and are out having fun. Thus begins my long nights of staying up late, frantically finishing up my paper before the next few hours that it's due. But now I feel a bit better about writing the first draft, because I have always treated my first draft as my final draft. Now I can just write everything that comes out of my mind...that relates to the topic of course, but it case it doesn't, I can always change it later. And it's comforting knowing that a higher being like God is on my side, helping with my paper, because no other problems in the world are as important! I just want to point how respectful and understanding Lamott is. I mean it may seem like a small detail for most, but I really liked how she addresses to both audiences; those who believe and those who don't.
There was one thing that I didn't agree and one thing I didn't understand from this essay. What I didn't understand form this article was "the kid against the fence" under School Lunches. Like is there any wrong with a "kid against the fence", is he trapped? Well at least he was very helpful to Lamott in the end...somehow. And what I didn't agree with was how she wrote a draft twice as long as what was required. I mean if I did that, I would be going off on so many tangents to the point where the topic in of my essay is lost. Plus with all of the workload in college, I doubt that we would have time to write such a paper. I mean we would have time, but that would just cut into our free time of going out. I guess I'm just saying that because I'm a freshmen, but I'm sure that one day I'll be studying and working all the time. And I just went off a bit of a tangent, and you know what I feel fine...thanks Anne!
And ending her essay with her going to the Special Olympics was very heart-felting, it made me happy and I usually not get happy after reading an essay. And man I sure would love to make someone happy after reading my essay. And she's also a teacher, which for some reason makes it better. Probably because I respect teachers who actually care about their work, otherwise she wouldn't have written this essay. And I guess the best practice that I can get out of this essay is to just write whatever you want and proofread it later. It's beneficial because it allows you to write all of your thoughts and you can put them all together rather than trying to recall thoughts of what you thought were "bad". Overall, Lamott's essay did help ease my writing anxieties, so thanks again Anne!

What It Is!

Based on the work that I have done so far and the discussions that I've had in class, I now know that a rhetorical analysis is an argument supported by facts and critical analysis. And in order to achieve a great rhetorical analysis much thought, time and organization must be put into it. Now whenever I hear about a rhetorical analysis, my mind is set to think about the triangle: logos, pathos and ethos. And like I said, I think that the purpose of such an analysis is to debate about a certain topic that you strongly believe in and defending your argument with facts. I also think it's a way to strengthen your beliefs, because the more people that you are able to convince, the more confident you are in your views. To me, it's like a drive that makes you want to continue to argue; and soon enough ideas will just start flowing to the point where you so much that you'll need to sit down to organize them. And once you organized them, you'll come back even more confident on where you stand in your argument.

An idea or problem is needed in a rhetorical analysis, so that the writer can persuade others to either support his/her idea or support his/her solution for a problem. And it's not just about the essay and what it needs, but the writer as well. Because credibility is vital, or at very least, how knowledgeable the writer is about his/her argument.

I plan to organize my analysis by presenting my topic and pointing out an argument. I'll be using the rhetorical triangle techniques, logos, pathos and ethos. Then I will try to go in depth with each technique depending if my topic has all of them. I know that the rhetorical triangle varies in every topic, so I'll focus on whichever is my strongest: logos, pathos or ethos. I will also mention the positives and negatives of my argument. I generally start with a small positive piece of information, then I may give a negative one (impact of it may vary). But I follow it up with a more important statement, countering the negative one that I just gave. I mainly like to list the importance of the pros and cons on where I stand in my argument, because I know that not even side of a debate is perfect. If I were to type a paper will just using positive facts, I would feel really ignorant with my ideals. Plus I think that opposition is a great opportunity for you to get more information about your topic.I believe that it will help build a stronger background of how knowledgeable you are on your topic, thus enhancing your credibility as a writer. And based on the media that I selected, I think I have a better idea of what I want my argument to be. And so I'm now looking forward to start my paper with techniques that I have learned from my class about rhetorical analysis.

Propaganda

While searching online for propagandas, I read some that involved North Korea. Then I found a really interesting article about a music video that reopened North and South Korea's history of war. At first I was shocked to see such pretty women in such a way. But as it turns out, they had a message embedded in one of their songs. The artists are a popular all female singing group known as 4minute. Their song that was causing a minor commotion in Korea is titled "HuH". The lyrics in the song can be heard in a way that's boasting South Korea's constitutional democracy. The words of the song state that they can do "anything" and can't be controlled. It seems that they were targeting North Korea's communistic government negatively. Although the broadcast was not as affective as they wanted to be, their message was still clear. That the life style and health of the South is much better than up North. But even before this song, tension was already built from their history of war. And North Korea has threatened South Korea multiple times before. One threat was that they would make Seoul, the capital of Korea, into a "sea of flames". I'm glad that the South used a more nonviolent approach to try to counter North's threats. But they are just worsening the tension, thus provoking North Korea.
It was quite a clever idea to use the media to make South Korea seem like the place to be. Because Korean pop culture is well known in all of Asia, and is gradually spreading in America. Many Asian Americans in my community know more Korean pop stars or famous actors and actresses than they do for any other Asian stars who are out of the U.S. So in other words, South Korea has the international advantage when it comes down to the media. And using idolized singers is one of the perfect ways to show their advantage. It may catch the attention of some North Koreans and attract them to switch sides. Many things are possible when you use media to attract certain audiences, especially if the South showed that they have more liberty.
Well there are no doubts that propaganda techniques have evolved. It's because times have changed and technology now has a large influence in our lives more than ever. Like using music rather than posters is a major shift. I do hate that music is used in this matter because I see music as an escape, especially from politics. But I also think that propaganda is something that is clever and that I actually wouldn't mind reading. The majority of the citizens don't think much about it. And the messages that are of propaganda today relates to government issues such as political leaders, the economy and human liberties. Just as the song pokes fun at the North Korean leader, their economy and how the South has more freedom for it's citizens. So as of 2010, for this propaganda, the quarrel is between North Korea and South Korea.

Preliminary Thoughts

I have a strong feeling that I'm heading towards a family advertisement for my first paper assignment. The ad that caught my attention was the new 2011 Kia Sorento commercial; it's called "Joyride Dream". To start with, I got into this show called "Yo Gabba, Gabba", well my little siblings got me into it. Surprisingly, I think that this is the most successful kids show since "Dora, the Explorer". At first, I dislike the show, due to my perception as a teenager. But I gradually grew into them since my siblings watched it like everyday! And very slowly, I couldn't wait for it to come on so that I could jump up and down with my brothers and sister, laughing and singing.
Well, that's when this Kia commercial came on and I saw a character from this show. I was astonished and asking if that was legal or not! So every time I saw the ad, I would finish it till the end. Then after seeing it commonly on t.v. I started to notice some other familiar mascots, like "Sock Monkey"! I said to myself that I've seem he from somewhere. The commercial also had a "Mr. X" which is popular...somewhere. But more importantly, they had a teddy bear and a robot, two of the most classical toys ever!
This commercial was advertising a family type SUV and these toys were the perfect way to attract consumers. Especially towards children, they would just stare and question their parents for why they don't have that car. And another great addition to the commercial is the song: "How You Like Me Now" by The Heavy. This song is upbeat and gets you moving, it helps with ingraining the commercial into the heads of it's viewers. I would definitely have to say that the strongest rhetorical appeal of this ad is pathos. Mainly because it affects our emotions towards the toys we had when we were younger.
Roadblocks that I must overcome for completing my first paper is time management, procrastination, using too much colorful words and not staying on topic. I want to be able to have that feeling of time being on my side so that I can get my work efficiently. Because if I'm under pressure I'll get my work done much quicker, but it'll be full of nonsense and colorful words. And therefore I must stop procrastinating, I must start my paper with enough time to pull at all of my ideas and put them together so that they'll make sense. I basically need to work on my time management so that I'll be able to stay on topic, instead of going off on my colorful tangents. And what's really helpful is blogging, and that I am able to read my classmates' blogs. Hopefully I can get some feedback and am able to change my writing habits. So now my thoughts are that I don't regret taking a hybrid class. It'll help me with finding out how I can manage my time wisely and independently. But I will definitely use the time that I have in class to be productive.

Toilet Gender!

At first when I read the "Go Where?: Sex, Gender, and Toilets" blog, I felt like I was reading an article about inequality among genders or the unfairness that women face. Regardless, I kept on reading mainly because of the images of the different bathroom signs for men and women of all over the world. It was interesting to see how other countries viewed men and women. It was like a cultural experience through toilets. Although, I was annoyed by the little remarks that were italicized and below the images. Ironically, those little remarks caught my attention the most, simply because I wanted an explanation for how restaurants choose their men and women bathroom designs and why? But I was really disappointed to find out that they were just "clever" remarks from the writer. I also felt uncomfortable reading this blog, because it felt like I was targeted just for being a guy. The tone also enhanced how I read this article. The way she wrote "male as the universal and the female as the variation" was a bit chilling. Its as if she's saying that men had this unnecessary power over women and that it was not right.
But all and all I do agree with some of what Marissa wrote, which is how differently men, women and trans genders are viewed. To start with, some of the signs didn't really make sense and some were a bit offensive. To me, the apples were the ones that didn't make sense at all. But before we get to that, there was this one sign that had a red apple and the other with a yellow apple, I mean since when do apples have genders? The most offensive sign has a man "in a mobile position" and a woman who "looks like she's pinned against the wall". The man looks so free when the woman looks like she is about to get raped, or at the very least, held against her will. But if you're optimistic, you can say that she's just getting ready for a different sexual position.
For the most part, these signs were really creative! I was annoyed by her because she never said anything good about some of these signs, she never judged them for their creativity. It's obvious that there has always been status differences between men and women in the world. History has filled our schema with stereotypical materials or symbols relating to each gender. It's common to see these differences, but what's important is how we understand them and how we deal with them. I wouldn't blame most of the owners for what they did, because most of these signs we could tell which restroom belongs to which gender without thinking twice about it. So before we can change restroom sign, you should change our own perspective of each gender. But then again, if men and women were to reach perfect equality, then how are we to tell the difference between bathrooms? Maybe we should just have a unisex bathroom, that way problems for trans genders would disappear! But that's just ludicrous, for safety reasons obviously. So what should we do? Well just sit back and enjoy the signs or question them. I mean they don't bite, they're there to help you with your bladder emergency right? On and my favorite sign are the kids crossing their legs with eager looking faces. And the one with the blue guy climbing over to peep at the girl was hysterical!

The Rhetorical Triangle Smell of MAN!

When I first saw this magnificent creature of man, I couldn't help but to keep watching in humor. Recently Old Spice has been a sensation, not because of the product but because of this guy, Isaiah Mustafa! His role is the "perfect" man whom every man wants to be and who every woman wants to have. His campaign for the Old Spice product has been most entertaining and humorous, even his quotes are amazing. He has been booming the internet with his presentation of Old Spice.

As you can clearly read from my paragraph above, I have been writing about the man on the motorcycle rather than the product itself. So to me this is a weird strategy for advertising, but it's effective and it catches the attention of the general public. I believe that people will just buy this product because they are entertained on how the Old Spice was presented, I mean I would too. Their competitor Axe uses women, a desire of men, for there campaign. I think it's a great strategy, but I gotta say, Old Spice was way more original and their humor was awesome! Plus they kept me wanting to watch more, while I can easily predict that Axe will have an ad involving a man and how its product can woo women.

So in a way, logos was an appeal in this ad. Even thou the product's claims are outrageous, their approach was very logical. I mean we, as men, all want to be perfect, especially for the ladies. It's absurd to be perfect but hey, we all try right? And what's more reasonable was who they chose as their spokesman, Mustafa. Mustafa was a former wide receiver in the NFL; I mean what's more manly than an all-American football star, that was a rhetorical question! Secondly, this ad does appeal to pathos. It appeals to the audience with great persuasion, aiming for the attention of men and women everywhere. Men should buy it because it makes them more of a man, supposedly. But hey maybe the product will give men confidence, through seeing this ad we may start to be more extroverted. The power of persuasion should not be underestimated! I do agree that this ad does appeal to ethos. Although there's no reliability that this product can do all it states in it's exaggerated claims. It is endorse by a celebrity, especially one with great charisma. For this ad the speaker is the one with the power, not the product. He has complete control over his audience because he is able to catch your attention. And if you can remember the product and retain what he has said, then he has definitely done his job.

I believe that pathos was the strongest element in this ad, just simply by looking at this ad you can tell. A buff man on a motorcycle, definitely a great way to persuade the audience. For men, it's the idea or envy and for women, it could be the lust...eh? The message is that using the product will make men smell like a man, as if they know what the smell of men is. Well this ad is meant to catch and entertain it's viewers. What the man say made not relate to what the product can actually do, it is, however, comical to watch. It just makes you want to follow this campaign and cheer it on. I think that this ad is highly effective, but not so much the message, I mean I just loving watching the commercials. But I don't know if I would really buy this product. Well I do hope that Old Spice will make more commercials like this one.

I Can't Believe this Dude Knew How I Wrote my Essays!

After reading Roberts' essay, I felt that most of what he said applied to me in a great deal. I do admit that when writing my essays for most of my classes, I tend to use "colorful" words. I also tend to write down obvious content, even till the point of repeating the fact. I tend to use these techniques just to get to however many pages I need for my assignment. And in the end I get so use to this type of writing that it has been integrated to how I write, which is a terrible habit. I love his thought about taking the unusual side. I have learn from a friend that whatever you read try to contradict it, even if you agree with what is said. You should at least think about the topic from another point of view, that way you get more out of what you believe in.

I like how Roberts pointed out that we tend to not go into depth with what we write. He even gives us an example and how to fix them. When I read his second example compared to his first about football, it changed my perception on how I viewed football. And I actually believed that, wow, maybe playing football isn't that great for college students. Perhaps now I can learn to write more in depth rather then obviously paddling around or rushing to get an assignment done just because I'm lazy. What caught my interest was how Roberts wrote about colorful, colored and colorless words. He differentiated them apart as well as giving us examples. At first, I read the title and I didn't understand what he meant. After reading it through I had mixed emotions, because I use those techniques in most of my essays. I felt like Roberts knew what most students want today. And that is to get their work done early to get some play. We all just want that feeling of relief that we finished our work and that we don't have to face that penalty of being scolded. I personally, am still going through this same phase, even in college! I just want to finish work and get the sense of nothing to worry about and relaxation.

Although, reading most of Roberts thoughts, I would have to disagree with some of what he wrote. Under "Call a Fool a Fool", he writes that if a students thinks that his principal is a fool, then that student should just go out and write it. I believe that as anybody is writing, they should at least show courtesy or at least be cautious of what they write. Because other people could read it and can interpret it as a student just hating. And most writing full of hate are usually ignored and seen as foolish. This essay was written over 50 years ago and the times have greatly changed. School has gotten tougher due to after school activities and the amount of work a students has to do. My high school AP Psychology teacher even states that college is a lot more difficult than when he was in college, perhaps because of money issues and new technology. I mean we are a fast moving economy and we tend to find the most quickest and efficient way of getting our work done. Even if it means that we have to use colorful words then we'll use them; any means of reaching that level of relaxation and comfort. But I have learn that I should carefully analyze my topic and how I would present them, and that I should be more original. For the most part, this essay has been very educational. I hope to apply from what I learned from Roberts onto my next essays.