Reflection on Open Letter Draft

This blog post includes links to the drafts of open letters that I reviewed, as well as a reflection based on the feedback I received from my peers.

Oh, Mathias. "Arizona Swim and Dive Happy Holidays." 12/10/15

For peer review I looked at Grace and Stef's open letters.

1. I definitely demonstrated that I can analyze myself as a writer, and I believe that my assessment of myself throughout the drafting process was accurate.

2. I included specific answers to concepts I have learned, and addressed what parts of my writing have strengthened throughout my time in English.

3. I included direct quotes as well as hyperlinks to blog posts from my own work.

4. I did not explain certain choices that I made, but I don't feel I discussed any choices of my writing process or style.

5. I got specific with certain aspects of writing that I learned about and considered more fully throughout the class.

Draft of Open Letter

This blog post contains a link to my draft of my open letter, as well as some information for peer editors.

Oh, Mathias. "Bear Down!" 11/28/15 via Photos

I'm still working on this. I would love some feedback on what I have currently, just keep in mind I plan on adding more down the road. For now, I'd love to know what you thin of my writing, and how it fits the "open letter" genre, based on your personal opinion/knowledge.

Reflecting More on My Writing Experience

This blog post contains further reflection on my experience and process throughout English 109h.

Oh, Mathias. "Cutest Dog Ever pt. 2." 11/28/15 via Photos

1. Initially the biggest challenge I had was making sure I satisfied requirements, especially small things. Getting the process of blogging down was initially a struggle, but this became second nature as the semester kept going.

2. Most of the time management I learned was just good habits. Getting into a routine that balanced school and athletics was key, and I feel I did that. Writing wise, I learned a lot about drafting and revision, as well as process work towards larger projects that helped me tackle large assignments piece by piece.

3. Genre is the style/format that shapes a project. Learning about genre, and how to most effectively use genres, has been one of the most important ideas in this class. First, using your genre to reach your intended audience is very important, and second, making sure your work follows the conventions of a genre precisely will help make your writing and communication more effective.

4. One of the most important skills I learned that I will definitely use in future is how to carefully consider an audience, and how to plan to effectively communicate with them.

5. I think (for the most part) class time was extremely effective for me personally, and I feel I learned a lot in the classroom.

6. I think the least effective portion was some of the blogging, for example the punctuation revision, which seemed a little bit like busy work.

Revisiting My Writing Process

This blog post contains a personal reflection on my original blog posts which discussed time management and my writing style.

"Corgi" 11/27/15 via Daily Mail

I think clearly the biggest thing that has changed in my writing style is my process. Much of this has to do with the individual deadlines, and all the blog posts and process work we were required to do for each project. Unlike before, where I would only work on drafts and finals, I had to do outlining, and extensive background work, that led up to drafts and projects. Some of it felt like busy work, but a majority of it translated into my final products, making them generally more solid. Also, this process work helped me seriously consider aspects of writing I didn't spend as much time thinking about, such as audience and genre, making my writing not necessarily better, but more effective.

At the end of the day, nothing has changed about my time management. Although I do procrastinate, and tend to push things towards the end of their due dates, I only had one or two late assignment, and did everything for the class, as well as all my other classes. I don't think my work suffered in terms of quality because it was rushed sometimes. Moving forwards, I can see myself procrastinating less later in college, especially in grad school, as I have more time to work with when I am no longer swimming, and still not working full time. As far as I can tell from this class, I will be fine with any workload in any future class. The work skills I learned translate to my future more than the actual writing, as I don't see myself doing a ton of writing down the road. However the

Reflection on Project 3

This blog post contains a personal reflection on my third project, according to questions in Writing Public Lives.

Oh, Mathias "Cutest Dog Ever?" 12/11/12 via Photos

1. My primary revisions had to do with adding more content, as well as working in some visuals, which was much harder than I had anticipated.

2. Nothing about my thesis or organization changed. I had an outline already set out, and simply followed this pre-decided order and organization.

3. Not a lot of my changes had to do with reconsidering anything important like audience or purpose, but some of the small tweaks I made simply aimed at strengthening my argument.

4. I think the changes more had to do with clarifying my ideas to the audience than adding personal credibility.

5. The changes that I made just made it easier to track my train of thought and follow the logic behind my ideas.

6. For the most part my sentence structure and style remained similar after revision, the main changes just had to do with organization or adding where I felt was lacking.

7. Because my sentence structure changes were so limited, I don't feel they assisted in helping my audience understand my purpose any more fully.

8. Yes, I reconsidered the conventions of my genre throughout. Initially I expected to have a more visually based argument, but the conventions of the genre involved more logically organized text based arguments.

9. Ultimately, reflecting on my writing and revision process helps me to realize the shaping of my style throughout this class, and how it differs over time, and from genre to genre.

Publishing Public Argument

This blog post contains a link to my third project, as well as a great deal of information regarding my goals for this argument.

Glogner, Christopher "Finally Done." 11/22/15 via Medizinische Universitat Wien

1. Mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience currently stands on the issue (before reading/watcing/hearing your argument) below:

←-----------------------x----------------------------|x--------------------------------------------------------->

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree                                                                                                                          disagree

2. Now mark with an "x" where you feel your target audience should be (after they've read/watched/heard your argument) below:

←----------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------->

Strongly                                            Totally neutral                                                    Strongly

agree                                                                                                                          disagree

3. Check one (and only one) of the argument types below for your public argument:

         ___x____ My public argument establishes an original pro position on an issue of debate.

         _______ My public argument establishes an original con position on an issue of debate.

         _______ My public argument clarifies the causes for a problem that is being debated.

         _______ My public argument prooposes a solution for a problem that is being debated.

         _______ My public argument positively evaluate a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm supporting).

         _______ My public argument openly refutes a specific solution or policy under debate (and clearly identifies the idea I'm refuting).

4. Briefly explain how your public argument doesn’t simply restate information from other sources, but provides original context and insight into the situation:

5. Identify the specific rhetorical appeals you believe you've employedi n your public argument below:

Ethical or credibility-establishing appeals

                    _____ Telling personal stories that establish a credible point-of-view

                    _____ Referring to credible sources (established journalism, credentialed experts, etc.)

                    ___x__ Employing carefully chosen key words or phrases that demonstrate you are credible (proper terminology, strong but clear vocabulary, etc.)

                    ___x__ Adopting a tone that is inviting and trustworthy rather than distancing or alienating

                    _____ Arranging visual elements properly (not employing watermarked images, cropping images carefully, avoiding sloppy presentation)

                    _____ Establishing your own public image in an inviting way (using an appropriate images of yourself, if you appear on camera dressing in a warm or friendly or professional manner, appearing against a background that’s welcoming or credibility-establishing)

                    _____ Sharing any personal expertise you may possess about the subject (your identity as a student in your discipline affords you some authority here)

                    __x___ Openly acknowledging counterarguments and refuting them intelligently

                    _____ Appealing openly to the values and beliefs shared by the audience (remember that the website/platform/YouTube channel your argument is designed for helps determine the kind of audience who will encounter your piece)

                    _____ Other: 

Emotional appeals

                    _____ Telling personal stories that create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Telling emotionally compelling narratives drawn from history and/or the current culture

                    ___x__ Employing the repetition of key words or phrases that create an appropriate emotional impact

                    ___x__ Employing an appropriate level of formality for the subject matter (through appearance, formatting, style of language, etc.)

                    _____ Appropriate use of humor for subject matter, platform/website, audience

                    _____ Use of “shocking” statistics in order to underline a specific point

                    ___x__ Use of imagery to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Employing an attractive color palette that sets an appropriate emotional tone (no clashing or ‘ugly’ colors, no overuse of too many variant colors, etc.)

                    _____ Use of music to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    _____ Use of sound effects to create an appropriate emotional impact for the debate

                    __x__ Employing an engaging and appropriate tone of voice for the debate

                    _____ Other: 

Logical or rational appeals

                    _____ Using historical records from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

                    _____ Using statistics from credible sources in order to establish precedents, trends, or patterns

                    _____ Using interviews from stakeholders that help affirm your stance or position

                    _____ Using expert opinions that help affirm your stance or position

                    _____ Effective organization of elements, images, text, etc.

                    _____ Clear transitions between different sections of the argument (by using title cards, interstitial music, voiceover, etc.)

                    ___x__ Crafted sequencing of images/text/content in order to make linear arguments

                    ___x__ Intentional emphasis on specific images/text/content in order to strengthen argument

                    _____ Careful design of size/color relationships between objects to effectively direct the viewer’s attention/gaze (for visual arguments)

                    _____ Other: 

6. Below, provide us with working hyperlinks to THREE good examples of the genre you've chosen to write in. These examples can come from Blog Post 11.3 or they can be new examples. But they should all come from the same specific website/platform and should demonstrate the conventions for your piece:

Example 1:
Example 2:
Example 3:

Reflection on Project 3 Draft

This blog post includes two links to the peer reviews that I did, and then a reflection based on feedback I received in the peer review process.

Schoenly, Lorry. "Peer Review." 11/14/15 via Wordpress

1. Grace reviewed my draft.

2. The feedback I received was very straightforwards and clear. I understood everything that was included. I thought it was accurate, and I would've given myself similar scores.

3. For the most part my argument needs the most work. Most of my work so far has to do with genre and context, which is aimed towards setting up the audience. However, I still need to add a ton of content related to argument.

4. I feel like I have solid direction moving forwards, and have a good idea of what needs to be added to strengthen my project.

Draft of Public Argument

This blog post contains a link to my project draft. This is very much a work in process, and I will be spending a lot more time in the coming week working through this project. I have a very clear idea of where I am going moving forwards, just actually putting the project together is time consuming. For this reason I'd appreciate feedback that has nothing to do with what is missing, as I most likely know, but instead I'd love some feedback on whether or not the argument is effective.

"Work in Progress." 11/08/15 via longleafalliance

Considering Visual Elements

This blog post discusses the visual aspect of project 3 according to questions posed by Writing Public Lives.

Bergsrom, Bo. "Papercut Graphic Design." 08/11/15 via Wordpress

1. Does the image inform or emphasize my argument in an important way, or does it seem superficial or unrelated to my argument?
This question is important for me to ask myself before I chose images for my project. They need to correlate well with my argument to be effective and memorable, so the answer to this question should be yes, it does inform and emphasize my argument.

2. Is the image in close proximity to the argument it is emphasizing or illustrating?
I need to ensure that my images are all on the same slide as the argument that connects to them. If not they are pretty out of context and hard to understand. For all my images the answer to this question should be yes.

3. Is the feeling or tone that the image invokes appropriate to the visual-rhetorical tone of my argument?
This is especially important for me to consider with images that are not graphs. Most of my data goes hand in hand with a logos approach, but anything that is meant to come from a pathos approach has to do with imagery. For this reason I need to ensure the answer to this question is yes, the image is appropriate to the corresponding rhetorical tone.

4. Scan your public argument or your outline. Do your eyes move easily from section to section in the order that you intended?
This question is important to consider because of the key role organization plays to my argument. I have to continually consider what the logical order and flow of information is, and make sure that the layout of my slides visually directs the audience in my intended direction.

5. Do the visual images help you move from point to point in the argument clearly?
Again, as my argument is multiple pieces, using images to move from point to point clearly will help my project be that much more effective. Answering this question yes throughout will be key.

6. Do the different visual and textual elements come together persuasively as a whole, or are there elements that seem disconnected or out of place?
Ensuring that the visual elements of my project are directly tied in to textual explanation and argument is key to the success or failure of the argument. Keeping this in mind is key throughout.



After reading Chad and Grace's posts, I realized that everyone in the class is doing very unique projects, which will be very cool to see when the end result is finalized. Ultimately, with such diversity in projects, the most important thing for every individual, including myself, is realizing how our topic and genre work together to be the most effective. Utilizing visuals as effectively as possible starts with understanding how our genre can best fit our argument and topic, which I learned from reading peers discussions of visual elements.

Project 3 Outline

This blog post discusses the outline of my project, and discusses why these ideas are fitting to my goals according to questions in Writing Public Lives.

"Outline." 11/08/15 via Outline Productions

Introduction:

1. The opening 2 or 3 slides will be context.

    a. These will include a basic overview of the general controversy, and the two main issues.

    b. They will then discuss the parties involved in the controversy.

    c. Finally, they will discuss what sides believe what about the two main issues.

What best fits my argument for the introduction is the Define or Narrow the Controversy category. This is because I need to clarify the issues at hand and the points of view on these issues. My introduction will start with broad context, and narrow in and focus on what my argument centralizes on.

Body:

1. Discuss issue one regarding Froome and doping accusations

    a. Re-state the issue

    b. State both sides, for Froome and against Froome

    c. Argue for Froome and provide data, visuals, and logic to back up my argument

    d. Provide the counterarguments against Froome, and refute these using logic and visual support

2. Discuss issue two regarding Froome and Sky and freedom of information/data

   a. Re-state the issue

   b. State both sides, Froome was in the right in his reaction to the data, and Froome was in the wrong

   c. Argue for Froome was in the wrong using logic and pathos to back up my argument

   d. Provide counterarguments against Froome being wrong and refute them using logic

Supporting arguments:
Not enough data to prove anything.
Innocent until proven guilty.
Accusations of cheating are very severe and must be substantial to be taken seriously.
Data suggests unordinary but not impossible.
Nothing is definitive.
If Froome has nothing to hide why react in such a way.
Do you really have the power or right to act in such a way over data?

Major Criticisms:
Froome is performing at a level that is inhuman, he has been under question before, and his data suggests something suspicious.
The data rightfully belonged to Sky and was illegally obtained.

Major Support and Rebuttal Points:
As there is not a ton of support or criticism I think it is easily possible that my project addresses all the points listed above.

Topic Sentences:
Ultimately, despite accusations and suspect data, there is not clear data that 100% proves the guilt of Froome.

As the rule of thumb in legal situations, so it must be said about Froome that he is innocent until proven guilty.

Accusations of cheating against Froome are very severe and must be substantial to be taken seriously and acted upon.

The data that is quoted as proving Froome's guilt suggests unordinary human performance, but nothing strictly impossible.

At the end of the day everything that has been brought up against Froome is speculation, any solid data proves nothing, and people are grasping at lose ends to try and say something definitive.

Just because Froome is performing at a level that is questionably human, he has been under question before, and his data suggests something suspicious, does not, by any means, prove something as serious as doping.

The data that Sky owned was quite possibly illegally obtained, but this does not justify or lessen suspicion regarding their reaction to its release.

Evidence:
Evidence and support for these arguments comes from many many many places, all of which are included in my annotated bibliographies.

Oh, Mathias "Screenshot of Cluster." 11/08/15 via Coggle

Conclusion:
My conclusion will mostly be a recap of the sides I am supporting, and a brief overview of my argument. It will then look at the bigger picture of the issue.

The most applicable to my conclusion is the Future of the Debate approach, and I will most likely speculate as to where the Froome controversy will go moving forwards, as well as when the cycling events are that it might resurface as an important issue.

Analyzing My Genre

This blog post includes 5 links to examples of my genre, and then answers questions related to my genre from Writing Public Lives.

"Genre." 11/05/15 via CatAids.wordpress

Example 1:
Example 2:
Example 3:
Example 4: (This is not exactly an example of the genre, but an example of where my project would be published).
Example 5:  (This example of the genre is slightly more contextual based and less argumentative).

Social Context:
1. The genre is typically set in some sort of sports or cycling specific website, such as a cycling journal or a cycling news site.
2. The subject of the genre is cycling, and specifically what is going on in competitive cycling and what arguments are being made about this occurrence.
3. Cycling fans use the genre to keep up with competitive cycling news and to explore different arguments.
4. The genre is used mostly when there are big cycling events, or some big controversy happens in the cycling world. Its main purpose it to be visually organized which communicates an argument clearly and powerfully.

Rhetorical Patterns of the Genre:
1. Typically there is an initial slide or two of context, highlighting the important pieces of the context that need to be understood for the argument to make sense.
2. For the most part the visual style of the genre highlights and leads to an emphasis in logos and pathos. The patterns in these approaches all center around use of imagery to strengthen the argument.
3. The only similar organization has to do with context. There is typically introductory context, and then the genre launches into the argument in whatever order the author finds most effective.
4. The sentences in the genre can tend to be longer, and are thus more complex. However, there are not that many trends in terms of sentence structure that are common across the board.
5. Word choice can also vary, but for the majority of content is more academic and informative. However, depending on the situation it can become more informal.

Analyzing what these patterns reveal about social context:
1. The genre includes those who have the technology to access it, but excludes those who do not. It is also very specific to cycling and sports fans, and excludes those who aren't interested.
2. The genre doesn't encourage specific roles for readers or writers. (Maybe I am misunderstanding this question.)
3. The genre values that are encouraged for users of the genre are whatever the topic's values are.
4. Visual content and organized content are the most valued by the genre. Nothing specific is considered least valuable.



After reading Stef and Bailey's posts, I am not sure if I misunderstood this assignment entirely, or if the questions were more straightforwards and required simpler answers for my specific genre. Also, I realized that for most people their genre and place of publication were the same, and mine are slightly different, so I am not sure if this played into it, or if I need to be considering the place of publication as my genre.

Considering Types

This blog post discusses the type of argument I am considering for my project.

"Dogs Arguing." 10/30/15 via Pets Fans

The argument that I will most likely be using for my project is a position argument. I will be evaluating the basis of the Tour de France controversy involving Froome, and will be giving information that will support a side that I am arguing for.

Mixed into this argument will be refutation, which will argue against certain views. This is because I am taking different sides for different situations of the controversy, and must explain why the other side is less valid.

The arguments that I will not be using, and that are not as useful, are casual, evaluative, and proposal arguments. This is because the basis of these arguments revolve around providing a solution, which I will not be doing. There is no solution to the issue I am discussing, merely sides to be taken and positions to be defended.



After reading Chris and Austin's posts I realized what a wide variety of arguments people will be using in their projects. Ultimately there is no right or wrong answer for what type of argument you chose, it just depends on your personal approach and style, and your topic of choice. Everything is dependent on fitting your argument to your goals and purposes, which leads to different results for each person in the class. Also, I think that 2 or 3 types of arguments is a perfect number, that will give me and my peers enough content, but not too much to think about.

My Rhetorical Action Plan

This blog post includes a discussion of my plan moving forwards in relation to audience, genre, and reactions.

"Green Action Plan 2010." 10/30/15 via Riverside Public Utilities

Audience:
1. My audience will, for the most part, have general knowledge regarding the context of the controversy. Most of them will have preconceived ideas and beliefs about Froome's situation, and I will have to change some of their minds.

2. The primary values at hand are honesty in the sport of cycling, and the rights regarding public availability of data, as well as the protection of personal data.

3. I think the primary research for persuading my audience revolves around data. Numbers don't lie, and having research that can definitively say one thing or another will be extremely useful in crafting an argument and supporting it.

4. Displaying this data visually with graphs or video will be far more effective and easy to understand than just words on paper.

5. My audience primarily be interested in my argument for resolution, as much of what was written about Froome after the controversy was mere speculation. For this reason I am trying to convince them of a certain belief, and they can use this information in any way they see fit.

Genre:
One genre that would be effective is a power point presentation with text and visuals.

These examples are the best I could find of powerpoints with supporting text. Although these powerpoints are more contextual than argumentative, they gives a good idea of the genre.

1. The function of this genre is to balance a combination of visual communication with supplemental and explanatory text. The argument will be communicated through the text, and supported with visuals.

2. One of the struggles with this genre is I see it in more of a classroom or live presentation setting. Simply reading data from a power point is not always effective without live explanation, and attempting to explain through text does not always work. However, with some work, I can see this outside of a classroom or live presentation setting, being used as more of a visual guide for the audience to read.

3. This genre would suit logos and pathos very well, as visual statistics and explanations are straightforwards and logical, and proper use of imagery can effectively provoke strong emotional reactions.

4. As mentioned above, this genre will utilize visuals such as graphs and provoking images to strengthen the argument.

5. This genre will attempt to balance a conversational and academic style and tone. Depending on the accompanying visuals, I will either be conversationally appealing to emotions, or academically using logic to support my argument.

Another genre that would be effective is a video with data footage, images, and audio voiceover.

I searched for examples of this everywhere, but couldn't find exactly what I had in mind. This link shows an example of video footage, and voiceover, but instead of having actual video of myself speaking, I would include still images of data. Again, this is an example  of a similar idea, but not exactly what I am shooting for. There are a few instances of still images edited into the video, but this would be more common, and once again, I wouldn't actually be present on screen, or do any filming with a camera, but instead clip together a majority of images with recorded audio voiceover.

1. Although different in concept from the first genre discussed, this genre has similar goals and strengths. It is designed to balance visuals and explanations to create a powerful and clear argument.

2. The setting of this genre could be more widely available, through social media or other websites it could be published on. This setting is more wide and free than the first genre, giving this genre a slight advantage over the previous one.

3. Again, the genre would focus on logos and ethos. Using provoking visuals and firm data, the genre emphasizes logical facts and emotional imagery.

4. The whole basis of the genre uses photos, and possibly videos, to support the audio explanations and argument.

5. As I will be talking to my audience through audio clips, the style will most likely be conversational, although in some situations I will attempt to be as academic as possible.

Positive Reactions:
1. People understand the data behind the controversy more clearly because of good explanations and visuals.
2. People understand the logical approach to making an accusation of cheating.
3. People understand the overreaction Sky had to the data as being overly emotional.

Negative Rebuttals:
1. Some may argue that at the end of the day the data was rightfully Sky's.
Response: Yes, but if Froome is so adamant about being clean, he should be acting in as little suspicion as possible, so trying to hide something is wrong.

2. Some may argue that the amount of times Froome has been under question means he is cheating.
Response: People need to understand the gravity of a doping accusation, especially in the realm of cycling, and how hard it is to completely cheat the system in place to test for doping. As there is no definitive evidence of cheating, and merely speculation and slightly suspect actions/performances, this is still not enough for people to condemn Froome.

3. Finally, some may argue that suspect data does prove something about Froome.
Response: Yes, suspect data does prove something about Froome, but all it can prove at this point is that he is a masterful athlete, because it doesn't show anything that is 100% humanly impossible.

Analyzing Purpose

This blog post contains an discussion of my own goals for my argument in project 3.

Ede, Sharon. "Calvin-Susie." 10/30/15 via Cruxcatalysit

The main goals of my public argument is to convince two sides of a controversy to agree with one another on certain points that I believe to be right. My belief is that Froome should not be under such close scrutiny and shouldn't be accused of cheating until this actually can be proven. As far as evidence or proof, there is nothing substantial or definitive that justifies the accusations that are being thrown at Froome. On the other hand, Froome and Sky clearly had the wrong reaction to leaked data. I support their opposition on this situation, as if they truly had nothing to hide Froome should've allowed the data to be public. When arguing this I want readers to see the logic and reasonable position that I am taking, so that they can primarily agree with my argument, or at least be able to see the reason behind the argument of opposition.

Plausible actions/reactions:
Because I am going down the middle, and taking the side of (lets call them group a and group b, a being in support of all that Froome did, and b being in opposition of all that Froome did) each group in one of the two situations, my audience will most likely react in agreement to a portion of my argument.
I believe that even if some aren't convinced of my argument, they will still be able to see the reason behind the side that I am arguing, and will better understand the other side of the argument than what they agree with.

Not plausible:
Of course it is not plausible that everyone agrees with everything I have to say.
I don't expect everyone to finish my entire argument, and this will most likely depend on how I structure it.

Likely Consequences:
I don't expect to be reaching a huge audience, so I don't expect the consequences of my argument to be that widespread.
The first consequence I can foresee is that some audience members change their minds about what they believe about the controversy.
A second consequence I can foresee is that some of my audience learns about the Froome controversy for the first time, and as I am their first source, they will most likely agree with my argument.
If I was reaching a wider audience, and include the proper data to support my argument, I could see accusations against Froome being somewhat stifled as a consequence of my argument.

Possible Audiences:
Among the audiences are the two groups that I mentioned above, group a and group b. Both of these groups are equally likely to move towards my goal in some way, as I expect them both to agree with at least some of my argument. Also among my audience is those who have no previous conceptions or ideas about the Froome controversy, and have not yet taken a side. These audience members are most likely to advance my cause, because I expect them to agree with most of what I have to say.

Analyzing Context

This blog post discusses and analyzes the context of the Froome controversy that project 3 is on, according to questions from Writing Public Lives.

"Context Matters." 10/29/15 via Contextfm.com

1. There are two schools of thought in my debate, the first believes that Froome was doping according to certain data, and the other believes that Froome is clean, and furthermore that the data was private and illegally procured.

2. As I mentioned above, the primary points of contention are the question of Froome's honesty, and whether or not he is doping, as well as the issue of the data that was released regarding his Tour de France performance, whether or not it was legally distributed, and the harsh reaction to it being made public.

3. The points of agreement between parties is the sanctity of cycling, and the continual progress in the sport in sportsmanship and competition.

4. The ideological differences between the parties hinge on the question of whether or not Froome is actually doping, which it is hard to definitively say.

5. As far as the text that I am most familiar with, there is very little call to action for the audience in this controversy. The purpose of the information is mostly to inform the audience, and to raise awareness, as there is little the majority of average interested fans can do.

6. For the issue of doping, Froome and supporters' perspectives will be helpful for my argument, and for the issue of data, the perspective of those vying for freedom of information will be useful. I chose these perspectives because they support the situations that I believe should've played out at the Tour de France.

7. The perspectives that will be a threat are the opposite of those that support. These are the perspectives of those who are convinced completely that Froome was doping, and Sky and Froome's perspective on the data that was released. This may seem backwards, but it will make sense as I get more in depth with my argument.


After reading Grace and Zayla's blog posts, I realized how much people have been improving throughout this class, and how well most of the class is executing their assignments. Both the posts I read seemed similar to mine, reassuring me that I executed the assignment correctly. Another point I realized, is how important understanding the viewpoints opposing my argument will be. Refuting these views with information will strengthen my argument immensely, so I should keep the importance of this idea in mind as I proceed. 

Audience and Genre

This blog post discusses the target audience of my 3'rd project, the places I could publish my research, and links to examples of these ideas.

Lund, John. "Pets at the Movies." 10/13/15 via John Lund Photography

Audience 1:

Obviously the primary audience involved will be sports fans, and specifically those who follow cycling closely. They will be interested for more input on the Froome controversy, simply because it died down, and was never resolved. Also, going forwards into future cycling competitions it is an important reminder of what major scandal happened previously.

For this audience I could publish my research in more sports specific venues, such as a sports dedicated website or a sports journal. 

Examples:

Sports website:

ESPN
Cycling News

Sports Journal (Just examples of Journals, these are also websites but I could publish research in an actual journal form."

Sports Illustrated
The Ride Journal (This link opens to the Ride Journal homepage, where you can download the past versions of the actual Journal, as an example.)

Audience 2:

Another audience I may reach is less sports specific, and more controversy specific. This audience is the type of people who are very interested in news, related to all venues, such as people who read newspapers consistently, watch the new on TV, or are active in social media.

For this audience I can publish my research and opinions through more wider venues, such as more general news sources or social media.

News:

New York Times
CNN

Social Media

Facebook
Twitter

Extended Annotated Bibliography

This blog post includes a link to my extended annotated bibliography. 

"German Shepherd Puppy." 10/23/15 via InspirationSeek.com

Narrowing my Focus

This post includes a few edited questions from the previous post, and an explanation of why I think these are key to the focus of my project.

Jump, Paul. "Narrowing Road Sign." 10/23/15 via Times Higher Education

1. When did this controversy end/fizzle out? Is it still an issue today? Is Froome still under question today?

2. Was there any backlash about the freedom of social media and data?
3. What was proved about this controversy, and can anything be said about Froome's doping for sure?

I think these two questions address the main points of the issue. First, the initial question involves information about the current state of the controversy, and the importance of Froome's alleged doping, as well as the eventual outcome of the investigation, regarding whether or not Froome was evidently cheating. Second it deals with the information regarding the data, as well as the issue of it being removed.

Questions About Controversy

This blog post includes a compilation of questions about doping in cycling, specifically related to Chris Froome, and what information I need to know before diving into the public debate.

Butt, Kyle. "Upcoming Debate." 10/23/15 via Apologetic Press

Who?
1. How many times has Froome been under question about doping?
2. What kind of authority does Vayer have in the cycling world?
3. Who else on Sky was involved in this controversy?

What?
1. Is Froome still being questioned?
2. Is the data still unavailable?
3. Was there any backlash about the freedom of social media and data?

When?
1. When did this controversy end/fizzle out? Is it still an issue today?
2. What were issues in the timeframe leading up to the Tour de France involving Froome/Sky/Vayer?
3. Were there any other issues after the Tour de France?

Where?
1. Outside of the cycling community how much media was involved with the issue?
2. Did all of this happen at the Tour de France, or was it mostly in the aftermath?
3. Where were the resources that Sky used with Twitter to remove data?

How?
1. How has the media portrayed this in general? For Froome, against Froome, or indifferently?
2. How come scholarly media seems relatively uninvolved in this controversy?
3. How should media proceed with handling this issue going forwards, in future cycling events?

Reflection on Project 2

This blog post includes a personal reflection on my revision process after completing my second project.

de Ruiter, Bob. "Failection." 10/23/15 via Envatotuts+

1. The biggest portion of revision I did from draft to draft had to do with content. I expanded more and more as I continued drafting. I would rather write slowly, and go over my work multiple times before adding to it. This way I revise small portions as I go, and simply add content the further I am along in my drafting process.

2. My thesis evolved the better I knew the article. After reading it more and more and analyzing it more closely, I realized what was highlighted and valued by the article as extremely important. This effected my thesis, as I changed it to reflect my new perspective on the article.

3, 4, 5. As I mention above, the changes came from a personal better understanding of the articles thesis, and the methods with which this thesis was argued. The thesis changes this prompted did not effect my credibility, but gave a more accurate analysis to the audience. It did not alter the intended audience of my analysis however.

6. Most of the changes that I did to my project involving sentence structure dealt with punctuation, specifically commas.

7. Learning how to effectively and correctly use commas caused my sentence structure to be more clear, and thus the purpose and meaning of each sentence to be understandable. This lead to better understanding of what I was communicating for my audience.

8. Yes, at times I did have to reconsider the conventions of the genre, and most of this was related to my audience. We went over this in class a few times which helped me understand better.

9. Taking time to reflect on my project doesn't help me reconsider my identity as a writer. Instead, it actually makes me realize what my writing identity is. Typically I don't go through writing a project with a specific identity in mind. Looking back and reflecting on my project process helps me learn about how I write, and what is successful for me and what is not, helping me realize my writing identity.


After reading Jon and Grace's posts I learned a few things. One, people seemed to have a reasonable grasp on the personal writing identity and revision processes. Second, a lot of the struggles that my peers had were related to conventions of the genre. The analytical heavy style lead to verbose and complicated sentences, which in turn lead to tricky punctuation and punctuation errors. Also, the idea of balancing the audience as new students, while trying to rhetorically analyze was easily the hardest part of this project, and I'm still 99% sure I didn't execute this correctly.

Project 2

This blog post includes a link to Project 2

Punctuation, Part 2

For this post, I will once again look over Rules for Writers, and address more aspects of punctuation that I struggle with.

Hannah. "Punctuation." 10/22/15 via Story

I read every section of the book on punctuation, and found nothing that I needed to work on outside of commas. This may sound vain or cocky, but I truly believe that outside of my comma usage my punctuation is pretty solid.

1. A common mistake I find myself making is adding commas after a coordinating conjunction, which, according to the section, "avoiding other common misuses of the comma" is a mistake.

2. Another mistake I find myself making is found in the section, "do not use commas to set off restrictive or mildly parenthetical elements," which I find myself doing frequently.

3. Another mistake I make is adding a comma after a phrase beginning an inverted sentence. This is because I confuse the ordinary sentence and inverted sentence, and I feel there should be a comma in both situations, while in reality only one requires a comma.

After editing....
I learned nothing new about my writing style. My struggle with commas is something I have been aware of. For this reason, noticing the comma errors in my paper after reading about commas rules was not surprising or new. I learned lessons regarding punctuation, but not anything new about myself as a writer.

Example 1: "For this reason it is important to know the author of Scandal Upends Toshiba’s Lauded Reputation, before directly analyzing the article and its strengths, and, it is also important to briefly discuss where the article is published."

In this example the comma after the and that is underlined is unnecessary, and violates the rule that there should not be commas after coordinating conjunctions. 

Example 2: One article that was written about this issue is titled, Scandal Upends Toshiba’s Lauded Reputation.

In this example the comma included before the title of the article is unnecessary, and violates the rule that says commas should not be used to set off mildly parenthetical elements.

Paragraph Analysis 2

This blog post includes a link to a document which includes the body paragraphs of my project 2 draft, and my personal analysis of these paragraphs and what I learned after dissecting my own writing.

"Hamburger." 10/17/15 via Las Positas College

Link to paragraph analysis. (Update, still having issues with this, working on re-doing it in a different doc entirely, understand there will be a late penalty.)
First, I've had some issues with this Google document. I've been trying to update it as I update my draft, and then continue to analyze my paragraphs. However, the link has failed to work and I had to create a new document, replacing the previous one.
Second, I am structuring my ideas as smaller paragraphs so they are easier to read, and then am breaking them up into larger sections. For this reason analyzing each paragraph was different, as some of them contained some separate aspects of what I was required in each paragraph. Overall this exercise was very helpful, but a serious struggle.

The main thing I learned from my paragraph analysis is that I need more supporting information for my first portion of my paper. This might just have to do with the topic of these paragraphs however, as a majority of my initial work sets up the context of the article's content and discusses the author and publisher of the article. It is hard to provide support for this as I am, for the most part, communicating factual information. What I also discovered is that I find a good structure and systematic approach, I can ensure that all my body paragraphs are functioning correctly. Looking through each and seeing what is ideal, and what is weak, gives me a good idea of how to proceed with writing for the rest of my paper, and how to fix my weak work.

Revised Conclusion

In this blog post I include my original project 2 conclusion, and my revised and new project 2 conclusion, and why I think the new version is better.

"Conclusion." 10/17/15 via The Business Plan Shop

My original conclusion was weak. It merely mentioned the article and author, and then restated my thesis, word for word. My new conclusion includes similar elements, but extends the discussion of Toshiba to business in general, and addresses the "so what" of honor in business in general. Although I am still not completely satisfied with my conclusion, I think I am on the right track.

Original conclusion:
To conclude, Soble's article is very complex, and does a good job of summarizing the Toshiba controversy. However, Soble goes deeper than just the surface of the controversy. Through in depth discussion regarding the Toshiba scandal, content such as video interviews that provide further understanding, various outside sources, and a credible tone, Soble drives home the argument that Toshiba's valued and storied reputation was tarnished through their business scandal.

New conclusion:
Soble's article does a good job of discussing the Toshiba scandal, and really gets under the surface of the basic controversy. Using video interviews, a credible tone, and emphasis on cultural values the article communicates a clear message, honor and reputation is important in business. This issue extends much further than just Toshiba. The importance of honesty and trust in big business is understated. People of all classes and places invest their money and lives into business, and for these companies to scam them can have widespread and devastating effects on honest and hardworking people.

Revised Introduction

This blog post contains my introduction from my draft in its original form, and a new version that is written better, as well as an explanation of why new is better.

Tice, Carol. "Handshake Business Blobs." 10/17/15 via Make a Living Writing

My re-done intro has much more content first of all, and is more interesting initially. I used narrative to capture the interest of the audience as soon as possible. My transitions in my middle portion set up the context of the controversy and article better, and transition into my thesis more smoothly. My new intro might be a little long, but I think it is good for the paper.

Original intro:

Toshiba was involved in a huge scandal because they were inflating their profits illegally. One article that was written about this issue is titled Scandal Upends Toshiba’s Lauded Reputation. It was published in The New York Times in July of 2015, and was written by Jonathan Soble. Through in depth discussion regarding the Toshiba scandal, content such as video interviews that provide further understanding, various outside sources, and a credible tone, Soble drives home the argument that Toshiba's valued and storied reputation was tarnished through their business scandal.

New intro:

Maybe something big is happening, so you tune in to watch the news. Maybe it's Sunday and you’re having some beers and watching  football. Maybe you’re writing a paper for a class. Whatever the case, whatever screen you might be using, there is a good chance you’re using a Toshiba device. Toshiba is one of the leading technology companies in the area of TVs, and they dabble with computers, but, for a majority of their consumers, no one really knows what goes on behind the curtain. Much like the Wizard of Oz, when people finally realize what is going on behind the scenes, it is far from the spectacular expectations. 

Recently, Toshiba was involved in a huge scandal because they were inflating their profits illegally. This controversy had widespread effects in the business world, and is a huge issue currently in the field of business and economy. In the aftermath of this controversy the CEO of Toshiba resigned, which was a national issue, and attracted a lot of press. One article that was written about this issue is titled Scandal Upends Toshiba’s Lauded Reputation. It was published in The New York Times in July of 2015, and was written by Jonathan Soble. To discuss this issue and article, I will be rhetorically analyzing it. Soble uses a variety of resources and approaches to emphasize cultural values and ethics in his article.

Through in depth discussion regarding the Toshiba scandal, content such as video interviews that provide further understanding, various outside sources, and a credible tone, Soble drives home the argument that Toshiba's valued and storied reputation was tarnished through their business scandal.

Reflection on Project 2 Draft

For this blog post I will discuss my peer review and what I learned from it based on information from Student's Guide.

"Peer Review." 10/16/15 via Considine Considine Certified Public Accountants

For my peer reviews I looked at Chris and Grace's drafts.

While going through the Student's Guide I am realizing that I am very far behind on my drafting process. I have been struggling with the writing of my project, but reading good examples and reading self reflection and answering questions from the Student's Guide has helped a lot. I will be putting a lot of work into my draft over the next few days and the weekend. However, some of the following questions were hard to answer due to the fact that my draft hasn't reached the point that they discuss. For now I will just be as honest as possible and hope that points aren't deducted for my short and incompetent answers.


The following information is all related to questions posed by Student's Guide


1. My thesis is very identifiable. It directly discusses the rhetorical strategies that my paper will address, and does not use vague terms. I think I may need to add more to it if I add more to my analysis, which I can see myself doing eventually.

2. I am still in the process of writing my essay. However, my planned organization has an introduction, explanation of context of the article, then rhetorical analysis, as shown in my earlier outline. It will follow the order of my thesis, and finish with a conclusion.

3. I need to spend some time researching this because off the top of my head I don't even know that the five elements are.

4. I do discuss the effectiveness of certain rhetorical strategies in my draft, and will continue to stress this idea throughout.

5. Yes, the little content that I have so far effectively uses the text as support.

6. I have been struggling with my thesis, but now that I have seen some good examples I think I can write it. I will ensure that my thesis leaves the reader wanting more and answers the so what question by making sure it goes beyond my article and discusses the more interesting and important bigger issue. It is still not written currently however.