Therefore, by helping each other create tools that enable understanding within the media, along with empowering each other to use the existing tools necessary for media literacy, we engage in active learning. As a result of this, the the development of “digital wisdom” is a relevant and useful solution.
Thoughtful discussion that includes some strong analysis of Boyd.
It is very clear that infowars.com takes part in demagoguery. They use multiple tactics that Roberts Miller categorized.
Thoughtful analysis. There is a lot of great material in this post. Some of it appears to need some revision and refinement.
It was extremely hard not watch Alex Jones. I feel guilty for giving his website traffic and his video one more view.
I sympathize!
Alex Jones demonizes the left throughout his video. He claims that the left is hurting families. The value of the family is a core american idea. Hurting the family appeals to (if not all) most americans. Jones is drawing on an assumption he believes most people will identify with. Families = American. America = good. Therefore anyone hurting the family is bad and is hurting america.
Fascinating. Try to include the specifics of textual evidence to illustrate and support your analysis.
Throughout both articles she makes statements that allow the reader to understand that sometime YOU are in fact the bad guy. In the case of demagoguery your point of view takes a strong hold on who gets to carry the label.
Indeed, this was one of the big take-aways for me also.
One problem with Miller’s arguments is that he does not cite all of his sources. He uses these extreme facts to try to persuade people but he does not use correct citations which does not allow you to check and see the information for yourself. There are only two articles that are referenced with the title and the source of the article. Both of these articles come from the same place the Cato Institute. The author of the article “Lies, Damned Lies..” works for the Cato Institute. He is a professor for lawyers. Because of that it makes his argument less reliable to me. I know that lawyers are able to be very persuasive and are able to use data to point in the direction that they desire. Not just that but he also uses the same kind of strong language as Miller does. For Miller to be more persuasive he would have to find more data and cite it correctly. It would be helpful for him to find articles and data that are from medical sources.
This post contains interesting insights and shows potential. But it also seems as if it is still taking shape and could do with revision. Discussion of Boyd is brief. You show good evaluative instincts when examining Miler and Shieh. Try to include close textual analysis of their arguments.
This can be seen in contrast to the first version of the story. The first version is the story in a written text. This version includes information on the characters, their home and the kind of work they do. The story is composed of paragraphs, in a traditional written style. These two versions show the contrast in oral and written communities.
This post provides an interesting, thoughtful and rather general discussion of concepts in Ong. But it does not analyze the specifics of the Sundiata text. Try to include close textual analysis in future homework.
Without the use of written language we are not able to hold these complex ideas into our working memory.
Yes, this insight is central to both Ong's argument and Young and Sullivan's.
. Just as in academic writing, professional writing and narrative writing have a set of rules, so do oral cultures.
Interesting comparison.