Evaluation of Rhetorical Situations

In this blog post I will rhetorically analyze and discuss three different sources related to business controversies.

Mathias Oh. "Screenshot of Man on Soapbox." 09/25/15 via Tumblr.

The first article I looked as was a short piece in Slate that, in three paragraphs, talks about a portion of Subway's response to the recent controversy involving one of their representatives.

The author of the article is Daniel Polti, who has been writing for Slate for 11 years now. However, the party in question speaking is Subway. Obviously the company is being spoken for as a representative, but as a whole the company of Subway is a viable resource. They are very well established in modern economy, and they are obviously responsible for the controversy involving their representative, so are authority figures on the matter.

The audience is the entire population of America, and even of other countries. After Jared Fogle, the Subway rep who pleaded guilty on charges of child pornography and other felonies, was exposed there was national backlash and it became national news. Because of his longstanding representation of Subway, such a widespread company, many people are/were interested in Fogle, and Subway's investigation of him. As this article discusses these results, clearly the audience is anyone and everyone interested in one of the bigger controversies of late.

I've already discussed the context of the text slightly. Fogle pleaded guilty to illegal sexual activity on multiple accounts, and because of his affiliation with Subway, they were investigating to see if there had been formal complaints against subway about Fogle. This article briefly discusses Fogle, and the results of Subway's investigation regarding him.

The second article I read was from The New York Times, which discussed the recent scandal involving Toshiba's inflated profits.

The article includes a video of Hisao Tanaka speaking about the issue during a press conference. Tanaka was the CEO of Toshiba, one of the leading tech companies in the world, until a scandal recently forced him to resign. Tanaka, a native of Japan, was in leadership with Toshiba for the last 6 years, and among some of the more wealthy and powerful men in the world.

Tanaka's audience during his speech is the press, as well as those invested in the company and interested in the welfare of the business. There are clearly reporters recording the speech and snapping photos throughout, and Tanaka addresses shareholders directly. Again, this controversy is huge, and Tanaka knows this, so he knows that he is addressing more than just this specific audience, and is addressing a very broad and large audience, such as the people of America, Japan, and other nations, through media.

The context of this speech is Tanaka's resignation as recent evidence and information was released regarding accounting fraud and overinflated profit in Toshiba. Essentially Tanaka is recapping the discoveries that were made regarding false profit, and is apologizing for the mistakes and lies. He then steps down from leadership in Toshiba.

The final article I chose was from The Huffington Post, and discusses a controversy involving Uber and discrimination against gays.

I looked for data on the two men who spoke out against Uber, but I could not find much. As far as I can tell they are just two ordinary men, who both were angered by Uber's actions.

The audience of the two men's complaints is the company of Uber, and the rights community in general. The controversy is one of many involving Uber, and so many who are fighting for gay rights will read it, and many who are fighting for any rights will also read it.

The context of the article has to do with two men who kissed in the back of an Uber, and were asked to leave. They were offended by this, and filed complaints, creating backlash and media, and they posted their distaste on social media. This is not the only issue involving Uber, and there have been many complaints against discrimination amongst Uber drivers, and there has been severe backlash against the company as a result.



After reading Jovanka and Hunter's posts, one thing really stuck out to me. They both did similar things in analyzing their texts. However, the important thing I realized is that I should be looking analytically at sources, very in depth, before I choose them for my project. If I end up choosing a bad or really difficult source, it will make the next project that much harder for me.

Developing a Research Question

This blog post develops questions related to current business controversies, that will help me explore my own interests in research and information.

Y12. "Digital Question Mark." 08/04/15 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

There are always controversies with corporations, and something is always happening in the world of business. Recently though some of the biggest issues are scandals involving the CEO of Toshiba, the Subway controversy with their rep, and a string of controversies with Uber. These are only a few of the biggest recent issues, and there are always controversies in the market and in the economy, as business ties into so many things.

First I think a good question is, "What kind of controversies and big issues are going on with big corporations currently?" This question will answer what major drama and scandals are happening with big industry and important figures in companies. Most of this is national news, especially with extremely important corporations, but some lesser known companies are not as publicized.

Second, another good question is, "What are some of the issues and controversies that plagues small businesses?" This is good because it give me a different look at controversy involved in industry, and is the opposite end of the spectrum of the first question. These two questions together should provide a ton of information and results, allowing me a wide range of selection.

Last, I think a good question is "What are some controversial businesses?" Although this sounds similar to the first two questions, it is very different. The first two deal with controversy within large corporations, whereas this question looks at what corporations are controversial and questionable.

Reflection on Project 1

This blog post is my own personal reflection on my writing process during Project #1, and what was challenging and what was successful in my QRG.

Howcheng. "Mount Hood Reflected in Mirror Lake, Oregon." Unknown, via Wikipedia. Public Domain Dedication License

1. The biggest struggle related to my controversy was the narrowness and simplicity of it. Although I did expand into other areas, the biggest issue was the one and done aspect of it. The controversy I chose was related a one time issue that was never really resolved, and nothing was actually proved, so it was hard to argue anything, or stir up empathy or interest from the audience at times. In a few instances I felt like I was trying to make a big deal out of a simple occurrence, but then I realized that that is what much of sports journalism is, and what most controversies are nowadays, a big fluster about nothing. This was the only big issue I came across in my QRG process, and I dealt with it by finding tons of references and sources to emphasize the reality of the controversy.
2. The biggest successes I found in the project were the exercises related to clarity. Having such specific editing processes, related to such an important idea, was key to the process of my project. Clarity is something I struggle with, so getting some advice on it, then applying it directly to my editing was very helpful, and, I think, successful. Also, having a clear idea of what to edit for in general lead to great success. Instead my typical random and unfocused approach, having goals in mind was more concrete, organized, and helpful.
3. As I said before, nothing was resolved with my controversy, so it was hard to make arguments. I used visuals, a wide variety of sources, social media, and hyperlinks as effective rhetorical strategies. One writing practice I found effective (I think) was drafting more words and content, and then finding imagery to fit it. I started with a general outline and foundation of ideas, then elaborated on important points, then filled in with supporting images and more content. This led to solid organization and clear central ideas, with lots of support surrounding it. I went with simple design choices, which I felt was clean, but still appealing to the audience.
4. My arguments were not effective simply because of the controversy I chose, and there was not substantial data for either side. The writing practice I followed fell short with quotes. I didn't have many quotes originally, and instead went back and added them. I added them to strategic places where they fit, and my quotes were not out of place, they just caused redundancies and overly long paragraphs in some situations. A place where my design choices fell short was in my lack of questioning subheadings, that I found very successful in the example QRGs.
5. This writing process was similar in that I had a drafting stage and a revision stage, and I had to write an annotated bibliography. The emphasis on visuals and source variety was also similar to some projects I have had in past writing classes, such as my English 205 class I took at Highline College recently.
6. The process was different from past experiences in that there was so many small pieces leading up to it in the form of blog posts. Also, the genre of a QRG was completely new to me, and some of the conventions of the genre such as hyperlinking were new. Finally, the guided editing process through reading of a textbook was a first time experience, and was extremely helpful.
7. I think a majority of the skills I learned from this writing process will be useful in the future. The clear and goal minded editing process will be a huge help to me in the future, and everything I learned on clarity will come in handy everywhere in my life. The only things I see possibly not being used are ideas specifically related to the genre of a QRG that I learned, but even many of these, such as the power of imagery, can be utilized in many genres.






After reading Michaela and Olivia's blog posts I realized two things. First, is that the initial stages of writing can be very difficult, and all the planning and pre work can get long, but it is crucial to a successfully organized and well written final project. Mastering the pre-drafting and drafting process will be key to my writing success. Second, I learned that understanding complex material, in order to simplify it and communicate it clearly is key to many writing projects and processes. Again, clarity is key, but it hinges immensely on personal understanding, which is a view I hadn't considered before.

Project #1

This blog post is simply a link to Project #1.

Clarity Part 2

In this blog post, I will once again discuss my weaknesses in writing clearly, directly related to sections of Rules for Writers.

Rejon. "Bocomo Missouri Pond Rejon's Parents." 04/24/10 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License

The first section on clarity I read over had to do with misuse of words, which is a problem I find myself struggling with on the rare occasion. The section just reminded me to be wary of certain words that I use that I think are synonymous to what I mean, but carry slightly different meanings, altering what I communicate.

Second, I read through a section on writing clearly, that discussed revising language that could potentially be offensive. Although this may not be an issue that I tend to struggle with, I feel it can be a trap that many can fall into unknowingly. Accidentally using offensive language without the intent of offending others can happen, and being aware of this is important.

For my third section I examined a portion of text that dealt with simplifying sentence structure. I think this might be the most important lesson for me to learn, and to integrate into my QRG. Often my sentence structure is overly complicated and confusing, especially for the less formal genre and style of a QRG. Learning to simplify my sentence structure by learning what types of words create extra words will make my QRG more straightforwards and clear for the audience.

Finally, I learned how to vary my sentence openers. Just learning how to maneuver certain phrases and words in my sentence structure to create clear and creative openers was a valuable lesson. This will be implemented into my QRG throughout, I am sure.






After editing my draft most of what I assumed in my earlier discussion was confirmed. While the two first sections I read were very useful lessons, they were not applicable to my draft, as I did not misuse words or use any offensive language. The second two portions I read were very helpful for my draft, and lead to key edits. Organizing my sentence structure, and streamlining it for clarity is important in the QRG genre. In the same way, I shuffled sentence order around to create more unique openers, that were easier to read and transitioned smoother.

An example from my draft is the sentence "However, he is by no means the only cyclist who participated in illegal conduct to enhance his performance." Previous to reviewing how to create unique sentence openers this sentence read, "He is by no means, however, the only cyclist who participated in illegal conduct to enhance his performance." After the edit the transition is smoother and the sentence as a whole has more flow, making it easier to read, helping the reader get down to the point the sentence communicates more easily.

Another example from my draft is the sentence "The data paired video footage of Froome’s race with corresponding information on Froome’s bodily and physiological functions during his cycling." Previous to editing this sentence read, "The released data paired some video footage of Froome’s cycling race with corresponding information related to Froome’s bodily and physiological functions during his cycling race." Clearly there are many unnecessary words here, due to a complicated sentence structure. However, after reading on eliminating unnecessary words, I was able to streamline the sentence and make its point more direct and clear.

Identifying Basic Grammar Patterns

This blog post contains a link to an analysis of the longest paragraph from the draft of my QRG. I will then reflect on what I learned about my own writing style.

Aungkarns. "Paper, Write, Pen."  08/11/15 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

From dissecting my writing and looking closely at the grammatical style I write in, I realized my writing style is fairly complex. It contains varied parts of speech, sentence structures, and lengthy clauses, and overall my grammar is, in my opinion, advanced. However, sometimes simple sentences can convey messages more clearly, and I should keep this in mind as a means of communicating extra important points, as clearly as possible.

Copy For Paragraph Analysis

This blog post links readers to my paragraph analysis of my draft, and then reflects on what I learned from analyzing my own writing.

Keistutis. "Comments Icon for Web." 02/27/12 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

For the most part my paragraphs were solid. They followed the guidelines of the QRG by remaining short and concise, but still managed to convey a main point. There were a few of my paragraphs that did not transition to or from the following or previous ideas, but I will continue to smooth this out as I finalize my project.

Reflection on Project 1 Draft

For my peer editing I read through and provided feedback on Grace and Jon's drafts. For the rest of this blog post I am going to reflect on my own work based on what feedback peers provided me, and what I learned through other students' work. This reflection is based of a portion from the Student's Guide to First Year Writing.

Gsagri04. "Mirror Frame." 07/28/11 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

Audience:

• My audience will mostly be my classmates and teacher. I learned from peer review that I need to add a section on why they should care about my controversy.
• My audience will expect a quick reference guide on my controversy, which involves recent issues in cycling, related specifically to doping and transparency of data. I learned from peer editing my introduction should give my audience an idea of what to expect from my post.
• I need to provide a good deal of general information, and specific information to maintain credibility. As far as I know, my classmates and teacher do not have overly extensive knowledge on cycling, so I should provide a good deal of context and background information.
• I should probably have a colloquial style of language.
• As I learned from peer editing, according to my audience and the style of the genre, I can be less formal in tone, while still providing depth and credibility in my information.

Context:

• The formatting of my post should follow the conventions of a QRG which entails subheadings, short paragraphs, and enough white space so things don't feel crowded.
• The content requirements of my guide is simply enough information to be a guide for readers, but not so much that it becomes a long reference guide instead of a quick reference guide. Also, according to my classmates' drafts I commented on, my QRG should contain a variety of sources, quotes woven in throughout, and good visuals. 
• Yes, I did not know what a QRG was before this class, so my draft should reflect that I learned this style enough to follow the basic conventions of it.
• I have payed careful attention to grammatical issues that were discussed in the class text, but I have not had any grammatical errors pointed out to me thus far in class or through feedback, so I haven't payed any attention to anything outside of class readings.

Clarity, Part 1

I selected four portions of the text, Rules for Writers, related to clarity, that I thought addressed my weaknesses most directly. This blog post discusses what I learned from these readings, and where I need to improve.

Sixsixfive. "Patch Document." 01/10/15 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

The first weakness I addressed was my tendency for writing long sentences. For this reason I read the section under clarity titled "wordy sentences." One of the most helpful skills that the text discussed, was the ability to eliminate three or four word phrases by replacing them with synonymous, single words. I believe learning to do this will allow me to communicate my ideas in more concise sentences.

Secondly, I addressed my weakness of redundancy, specifically in a lack of variety of sentence openers. Although I don't use basic sentence openers, I tend to cycle through a select few words or phrases, and use them to open every sentence. A reminder to vary my openers from the book, along with suggestions for other tactics and phrases, was very helpful.

Next, I learned about word omission, something I struggle with, without even realizing it. The most helpful advice the text provided was to read my words out loud, because hearing them can make you realize when the addition of a word, or omission of a word, can change the entire meaning of a sentence.

Finally, I read up on how to eliminate distracting tense shifts. Again, this is an issue I can solve by reading my work out loud. This will be key when I am discussing certain instances in time throughout my controversy, and the position I am speaking for shifts around. Keeping tenses the same throughout will be key to communicating information clearly.






Reflection:

While conducting my peer review I realized that everyone struggles with different aspects of clarity. People all have different things to work on, and learning techniques and having peers point this out is very helpful to being as clear as possible in writing. The only shared struggle of mine in the two drafts I read was wordy sentences, but both had small faults with clarity.

1. As an example of a long sentence I took a portion from Grace's draft.

"It is each person’s decision as to what nursing home they are to be living in and they must do the research to keep themselves and their family members safe.

Although this sentence is not overly lengthy, it struggles with overly long phrases that could be shortened, without losing the meaning of the sentence. For example, "as to what nursing home they are to be living in" could be shortened to simply "the nursing home they will live in."

2. As an example of redundancy I took a portion from Stef's draft.

"In the article Michelle Obama’s ‘Healthy’ Lunches, nutritionists are opposed to the bill. When interviewed they requested, 'strict sodium and whole-grain rules be rolled back, as well as the requirement that kids must take either a fruit or a vegetable with their lunch,' These strict rules lead to the children’s waste. The children are forced to take foods that they do not like, and these foods end up in the trash."

This lengthy portion of text shows up later in Stef's draft, almost word for word the same. This information only needs to be conveyed once, and if it is so important that it should be included again later, the wording and phrasing should be changed, and another quote should be found.

3. As an example of word omission I used a portion of Jon's draft.

"One of these wrinkles is a shady CEO..."

What is omitted in this case is the name of this CEO, and it is omitted throughout the entire draft. A name for the reader to reference the CEO is crucial to clarity, especially as this is not the only mention of the nameless CEO in the draft.

4. Finally, I kid you not, I read through everyone's work who had a draft posted at 09/19/15, and could not find a single example of awkward tense shifts to provide. Hopefully this does not lead to a penalty in points, but I simply couldn't find an outside example from my peers' drafts.

Thoughts on Drafting

This blog post will dissect my own personal opinions on the usefulness or uselessness of certain information from the book A Student's Guide to First-Year Writing.

IggyOblomov. "Writing Hand." 08/18/14 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

1. Helpful information:

Probably the most useful portion of the text, in my opinion, was the discussion on how to write paragraphs in the PIE format. As the QRG genre tends to have shorter paragraphs, I think learning to craft paragraphs that are informative, in the most word effective way possible, is extremely important to creating a successful QRG. Therefore the book's discussion on important components of paragraphs and good methods of writing them is very helpful.

Not all of the information included in the discussion on introductions was applicable, but in general the text provided helpful ideas on how to craft skillful and attention grabbing intros. This is not only important for the opening of a QRG, but for introductions into different subheadings and different portions of the QRG. There is not only one introduction in a QRG, and everyone of them must recapture the audience, so this is a very important part of a QRG.

The section on organizing information is also very helpful for writing a QRG. One of the conventions of QRGs is subheadings, and deciding how to divide different information is crucial to having a successful QRG. Organizing all your research and sources into different sections and with different subheadings is very important to the genre, so this section on how to do this is key.



2. Not as helpful information:

First, the information on how to craft a thesis statement is not as useful for the QRG genre, as it is not a college essay format, three paragraph essay format, or argumentative format. Instead, it is a informative and less formal work of writing, that typically has no clear thesis.

Second, although not completely useless, the book's discussion on conclusions is not as applicable to QRGs as it can be to other genres. It is important to try and answer questions posed in subheadings, and it is important to finish your thoughts strongly, but because of the conventions of the genre and the informative nature of a QRG, there is never really a definite conclusion to the piece.




After reading Austin, Chris, and Aaron's posts, I realized most of us said similar things about what general information from the text was useful, and what wasn't. However, from each post I recognized a specific area where my own draft could be much better.

1. I need to focus more on imagery and visuals throughout my drafting process. I've been planning on going back and adding them later, but I think it would be better to do as I am in the drafting process, as not only will my draft shape the images, but the visuals will help shape my draft.

2. I found that logos is in important piece of the QRG, and wrapping all sides of the argument into one, informative, piece of writing. I will incorporate this into my drafting process from now on.

3. I need to find the perfect balance between paragraphs that are informative, and paragraphs that are less formal. I don't know if I can successfully mix and match these two together, to have more informal style that is still informative, but I will definitely experiment throughout the drafting process.

Draft of a Quick Reference Guide

As of right now I am nowhere near the amount of content or information that my eventual QRG will contain. I will be continually updating this post with new links as well as requests for peer editing. As far as the draft right now is concerned, it is edited by myself, but it is very short, so all feedback is welcome, just keep in mind I am planning on adding a lot. Thanks!

Bonzo. "Type Writer." 12/14/14 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License. 

Practicing Quoting

This blog post includes a screenshot of two quotes I selected, and my comparison and breakdown of the two. They are from different sides of a controversy involving questionable data related to Chris Froome and his Tour de France victory.

Oh, Mathias. "Screenshot of my Google Doc Paragraph." 09/12/15 via Google Docs.

QRGs:The Genre

To discuss the controversy of Chris Froome, and doping in cycling in general, I will be using the style of a QRG, or a Quick Reference Guide. This blog post is purposed to discuss, based on other examples of QRGs, how exactly to construct a QRG, and what key elements are used for what purposes when writing in the QRG style.

GDJ. "Woman Reading Silhouette."
06/27/15 via Clipart.
Public Domain Dedication License

1. The conventions of the QRG are fairly loose. There are not a lot of content guidelines that QRGs follow, in terms of topic, and there are writings the the QRG style in a huge range of topics. However, many similar things are included in most QRG pieces. QRGs tend to have many short paragraphs, large variety of sources, from multiple different genres and academic levels, lots of hyperlinking, various images, and finally subheadings.

2. The QRG uses very specific formatting to communicate information. The headings are, for the most part, in question form and are bolded. The questions posed by headers are answered by short, unindented paragraphs, which sometimes include hyperlinks, quotes, or images.

3. The purpose of the QRG seems to be a broad view of a specific topic, controversy, or interest. They are almost guides of sorts, that address questions and issues using a huge variety of sources and material to communicate information, making them a good way to get a broad picture of a certain idea.

4. Because of the variety of sources used by QRGs, typically QRGs are intended for a broad audience. They include social media sources for those more up to date, as well as scholarly sources for those who are looking deeper at issues. Obviously QRGs have a specific audience in mind, such as the guide intended for gamers, but their extensive information makes them a great source for any interested reader.

5. QRGs can use imagery in many ways. They can use images to break down directly, show photos of data that they then use in their writing, or they can simply include photos that are never directly mentioned, but are meant to convey certain messages. Images in QRGs in general make for more persuasive and powerful works, and are key to a solid QRG.



After reading Jovanka, Grace, and Chris' posts, I realized first off that all of us said similar things, so we all have a fairly good idea of what a QRG is. Second, I found ways to make my descriptions shorter, but still informative. I need to be able to answer questions more concisely in the future. Finally, from Grace's post I saw areas where I could answer questions more directly and clearly, so that they line up with the rest of my information on QRGs better.

Cluster of My Controversy

This blog post is a mind map or cluster of the controversy involving possible drug use by Chris Froome in the Tour de France, and the data that was released regarding Froome's physiology and bodily functions through certain portions of his race. As the specific controversy I am discussing is limited to a few parties, whereas doping in general in cycling is more widespread, I made my cluster include not only those involved with Froome, but big entities involved fully in doping and cycling. Even with this, my cluster is still fairly small, as there are not very many important individuals involved in the controversy.

Oh, Mathias. "Cycling Cluster." 09/12/15 via Coggle.

Annotated Bibliography in Physiology's Style

This blog post is an Annotated Bibliography of all the sources I analyzed and complied in my last blog posts. My sources are cited in the Journal of Physiology style, according to their online guide.

Crisg. "Diary." 08/29/13 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

• Austen, I. (2015). At Tour de France, Chris Froome’s Dominance and Leaked Data Attract Scrutiny. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/16/sports/cycling/chris-froomes-dominance-at-tour-de-france-attracts-scrutiny.html?_r=0 [Accessed September 10, 2015].

This New York Times article discusses the controversy of Froome, and his possible performance enhancing drug use. It summarizes a portion of the Tour de France, then discusses the video and data that was publicly released that brought Froome into question. It then details the discussion between Vayer, a anti-doping representative, and Froome, and how the data fit into their argument. This was the first article I read on the controversy, and so all my initial findings related to this story were from this article. The articles purpose is to introduce the controversy to the public. As it details the controversy in a detailed but not over-complex manner, I will use this article frequently.

• Hurcom, S. (N.D.) Sophie Hurcom’s Social Stories. Available at: https://storify.com/sophiehurcom [Accessed September 5, 2015].

This source is a Storify account of one Sophie Hurcom. It contains a fair amount of information, not from Sophie herself, but what she has complied, and her purpose was simply to put together information with a few of her own comments and ideas. There are many screenshots of Tweets and other social media from famous cyclists, professional coaches, and many other authorities on cycling. The biggest benefit of this source is that it contains a great deal of input from many directly involved, and is not information coming indirectly from media and reporters who can twist and spin words. For this reason, I see myself using this source a great deal.

• Palmer, B. (2012). Riding High-Why is there so much more doping in professional cycling than in other sports? Available at: http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/explainer/2012/06/lance_armstrong_charged_why_is_there_so_much_doping_in_professional_cycling_.html [Accessed September 10, 2015].

The purpose of this article is to explore why doping in cycling is so much more rampant than in other professional sports. The article discusses the recent (at the time) national controversy of Lance Armstrong and doping. It then analyzes the history of doping in cycling and lays out the complex doping process and testing procedures to attempt to understand why it is so common amongst cyclists. This article was helpful for my own personal understanding of why doping is such an issue in cycling, so it will be helpful for me to use to explain that to readers of my project.

• Petrequin, S. (2014). Everything You Need To Know About Doping Before The 2014 Tour de France. Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/07/04/tour-de-france-doping_n_5558680.html [Accessed September 10, 2015].

This Huffington Post article is meant to prepare readers for the 2014 Tour de France, which at the time of the articles was still upcoming. It methodically goes over the history and tradition of doping in cycling, and the important information that those interested in viewing the upcoming Tour de France should know. It also mentions Froome briefly for some controversy he caused, as well as other controversial situations leading up to the event. As it lays out a good foundation of the history of doping in cycling for the casual observer, I will use this article a lot.

• Real Gaz of Trumpton. (2008). Available at: https://twitter.com/gazza_d [Accessed September 5, 2015].

This is the personal Twitter account of “Real Gaz of Trumpton,” whose true identity I could not discover. It is his/her musings on random topics, but he/she is clearly involved in cycling, and likes to post his/her personal opinions and ideas based on big occurrences in the cycling world. This source did not lead to any major results, but I did observe that it is not a credible source, and thus do not see myself using it extensively, if at all, in the future.

• Reichman, N, Sefiha, O. (2013). Regulating Performance-Enhancing Technologies: A Comparison of Professional Cycling and Derivatives Trading. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 649, 98-119.

This journal article discusses the evolution of doping in the realm of cycling. It looks at the advancements in technology, and the increasingly complex methods of successfully getting away with doping. These more advance methods, in turn brought greater results, making athletes perform to an entirely new level. The purpose of this article is to track the change and growth in the doping industry, and to display the increased results. As it is scholarly and contains tons of information on the subject and process of doping, I will use this article extensively.

• Ross, B. (2015). Long Live Transparency-The Data Video Controversy. Available at: http://sportsscientists.com/2015/07/long-live-transparency-the-data-video-controversy/ [Accessed September 5, 2015].

This article, from Sports Scientists, approaches the controversy of Froome from a more athletic standpoint. The purpose of the article is to argue that the information and data that Froome has covered up should be available, and that hiding it suggests guilt. The article begins by introducing the circumstances of Froome, and the data that was released about his cycling, then discusses the suddenness with which it was covered up. This strange cover up lead to skepticism and speculation regarding the validity of the data, and the hushed nature that it was treated with. This article furthered my knowledge on the physiology of the data that was discovered, and will be used extensively to highlight the importance of and connection between physiology in the cycling controversy.

• Strulik, H. (2012). Riding High: Success in Sports and the Rise of Doping Cultures. Scand. J. of Economics 114(2), 539–574.

The purpose of this scholarly article is to break down further the implications and effects of doping, not only on athletic performance, but on much more. The article scrutinizes the decisions that athletes make whether to dope or not, and how they consider their athletic improvement as well as reputation and standing with peers. It also speculates on how doping and the culture it creates can be eliminated, and what factors play into this. This is an extremely complex article, and is not centered on exactly what I am considering with my controversy, so I see myself using it, but only a little.

• Tour de France-Chris Froome data released amid doping claims. (2015). Available at: http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/cycling/33611854 [Accessed September 5, 2015]. 

This is another article written with the purpose of providing information on the controversy involving Chris Froome and the questionable data released about him. However, this article is discussing data that team Sky, Froome's team, has released, and the article brings up this data then lays out the accusations of skeptics, questioning if the data released will silence the doubters. Probably the most useful part of this article is the interview of Froome. I have an article that is similar, that I like better, so I will only use this source a moderate amount.







After reading Zayla and Stef's blog posts I realized two things. First, I am glad that I have practiced citation styles in the past seemingly endlessly, because it makes me comfortable first with my own bibliography, but also allows me to find and help with small mistakes and quirks of citations. Second, I realized that I need to spend a little more time exploring how to use the blogging format to the best of my ability, and in the most effective way possible. I say this because I spent a little time trying to figure out how to use a hanging indent in my bibliography, then decided it was impossible in the restrictions of the blog format, and gave up. However, clearly from other peoples' posts this is not the case, and I just need to explore and research how to use Blogger more comfortably. 

Ideology in My Controversy

I have compiled six sources related to doping in cycling, but now I need to analyze the controversy more closely. This blog post will discuss who is involved in the controversy, and what sides argue what.

There are three major parties involved in the controversy. There are athletes, specifically cyclists, there is the media, and there are the people who brought forth data and evidence of possible foul play who are also involved in anti-doping organizations.

The two main people involved in the controversy are Chris Froome, the cyclist in question, and Antoine Vayer, the one who publicized the questionable data. Both are well known in the cycling world, as Froome is very successful, and Vayer has worked in anti-doping in cycling for some time. There are numerous members of the media involved in reporting and writing about the controversy.

Clearly the media holds a significant amount of power in this situation, and the spin they put on certain events and data can have large impacts on the controversy. Also, Froome seems to have a fair amount of power as well, as his team, team Sky, had the data removed and the Twitter account it was posted on suspended. Vayer also has a significant amount of power, because of his longstanding role in anti-doping in the cycling arena.

There are endless resources available to all three major parties. The media, obviously, is huge and endless and has many, many resources available for reporting data and writing stories. Froome has many resources also through his team Sky, such as lawyers, to protect himself. Vayer has technology and footage that allows him to get data, as well as involvement with anti-doping that allows him to test and investigate cyclists’ physiology.

There is evidence for Vayer based on the data that he procured, but there is also not enough for any accusations or inferences to be confirmed. This lack of data is evidence for Froome, and enough that he has not been punished or even caught, if he even is cheating.

There is not a power differential between the groups. The media has the most power of the three groups, and what they say will sway the public, but between Vayer and Froome there is a stalemate as far as both sides are concerned. Vayer needs more evidence to catch Froome, and Froome needs to undoubtedly prove his innocence. Both of these are tall tasks, making it a back and forth situation.

Francesco_rollandin. "Architetto -- Bicicletta."
04/19/09 via Clipart. Public Domain
Dedication License.

The common ground between the two is cycling, and Vayer even admits to not being against Froome or being his opponent. Vayer does not want to condemn Froome, but instead wants to analyze data for the sake of cycling. If this means he catches cheaters, then it is for the good of cycling. Froome might not be a fan of Vayer, but if he isn’t cheating, then Froome should feel no threat or real opposition from Vayer, but Froome also expresses his desire for the furthering of cycling.

This common ground is acknowledged by Vayer, but unacknowledged by Froome. As far as I can tell there is no other common ground between the two.

Vayer and Froome both respond directly to one another, as well as to the media, and a majority of the questions that it poses towards them. 

My Thoughts on Comments

Should College athletes be payed, and reimbursed for the effort they put forth to make their schools money? This controversial question has lead to many debates and has stirred up many to chime in through articles, or comments sections. This blog post will analyze the opinions of four people, two reasonable and two unreasonable, who have commented on the issue of college athletes and pay.

The order of my comments goes not credible, credible, not credible, and finally credible. The article the comments are on is titled "NCAA Schools Can Absolutely Afford to Pay College Athletes, Economists Say." 

Oh, Mathias. "Screenshot of Comment." 09/05/15 via Huffingtonpost.

The first not credible comment comes from Wayne Fuller. It is short and simple, but Wayne clearly is expressing a fantasy, where not being payed equates something to slavery. This claim is clearly outlandish and overblown.

It is hard to tell what exactly Wayne’s values are, but I can guess he thinks that people should be well payed for their efforts, whether it is fair or not.

It is clear why this comment lacks credibility. Student athletes are not payed, but they are still given scholarships that pay for their education, receive free gear and many other perks, and get to use amazing facilities to train and compete. Slavery was cruel, awful, and inhumane, so to compare these two ideas simply because of a lack of pay is a stretch of the imagination to say the least. 

Oh, Mathias. "Screenshot of Comment." 09/05/15 via Huffingtonpost.

The first credible comment comes from Austin Krol. Once again it is pretty short and straightforward. Austin is not communicating any fear, but is hinting that he wishes he didn’t have to pay college tuition like athletes. 

Again, the comment is pretty short and it is hard to determine what exactly Austin’s values are.

Austin comes across as reasonable because it is true that having your college tuition payed for is essentially being payed, and collegiate athletes are receiving benefits and bonuses that normal college students aren’t, thus reimbursing them for their efforts. 

Oh, Mathias. "Screenshot of Comment." 09/05/15 via Huffingtonpost.

The second not credible comment comes from Albert Wedworth. The comment is short, but from it it is clear that Albert is clearly afraid of the media and sports, and their apparent attempt to brainwash the mass population.

Albert clearly values his own opinions and safety, and will not jeopardize this to the, ‘controlling’ and ‘scary’ media and sports.

Albert’s comment is clearly not credible, as sports are not an entire waste of time and money as he claims, as they are very entertaining to many. Also, sports are not used to control humans, they are used for the enjoyment of humans.

Oh, Mathias. "Screenshot of Comment." 09/05/15 via Huffingtonpost.

The second credible comment comes from David Bartow. The comment is fairly lengthy, but does not communicate any sort of fear or anxiety.

David’s values are clear. College athletes should be taken care of, and education is important, but it is very improbable that it work that they be payed.

David’s comments are credible because he is clearly very knowledgeable on the subject of college athletics, and every point he makes is valid. He is not arguing one way or another, just pointing out facts. It would be very hard to pay athletes, as all athletes would have to be payed, and athletes are already receiving benefits and rewards that others aren’t. 






Something I learned after reading Chad's post was that my organizational skills so far in my Blogging career are fairly lacking, and that I could do with some experimentation, as well as with looking around at other styles that work. I found this too in Aaron's post, but what I took away most from this post was that Blogging can be a less formal, more relaxed form of writing, and that I need to develop my own personality through my Blog more fully.

Evaluation of Social Media Sources

To continue to find more information on cycling and doping I went to social media to try and research more of what is going on in the controversy. This blog post will analyze two social media sources, and determine whether they are credible or not.

GDJ. "The Peril of Twitter." 04/02/15 via Clipart.
Public Domain Dedication License.

The first source is the Twitter account of “Real Gaz of Trumpton” I have no idea who the person behind the account actually is, but he/she appears to be an avid cyclist, participating in the sport and therefore having legitimate knowledge about cycling. The second source is the Storify account of Sophie Hurcom, an aspiring journalist and university grad. 

Real Gaz appears to be a cyclist, so they are at cycling events, but not famous or good enough to be at large scale events that Chris Froome would be at. As far as I can tell Sophie is not at any of the cycling events she documents via social media. 

Neither source has a following of anyone credible or influential in the realm of cycling.

The content that Real Gaz Tweets about cycling is mostly from their own opinion and ideas related to the sport. They appears to do their research, but their Tweets are their own weigh in on certain large happenings and events. On the other hand Sophie complies tweets from professionals and experts on cycling, and displays them with her own short comments. 

Both sources post consistently about cycling, and big events and controversies in the cycling arena.

Real Gaz’s Twitter is 7 years old and Sophie’s Storify is 2 years old at least. 

Real Gaz’s Twitter, after scrutiny, does not seem to be a reliable source about cycling controversies as it is all very heavily opinionated. Sophie’s Storify however contains many credible social media posts from other, more informed and respected figures in cycling, so can be considered fairly reliable. 

Evaluation Of Scholarly Sources

The controversy I initially picked had to do with studies and data of the Physiology of a biker in the Tour De France who was suspected of doping. To find scholarly sources on the issue I had to widen my results to performance enhancers in cycling in general. In this blog post I am analyzing two scholarly sources on the issue.

Merlin2525. "Injection." 04/18/14 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

The two articles I found, one titled, “The Rise of Success in Sports and the Rise of Doping Cultures,” (article 1) and the other titled, “Regulating Performance-Enhancing Technologies: A Comparison of Professional Cycling and Derivatives Trading” (article 2) both approach the subject of doping from different angles. Article 1 analyzes the decisions of professional athletes, and determines the pros and cons of doping in sports relative to their gained success and the opinion of other athletes. Article 2 discusses the impact of doping in cycling, and the evolution of performance enhancing methods, on the financial aspect of doping, and the market this created.

Article 1 was published in the Scandinavian Journal of Economics (SJE), and article 2 is from the Annals of the American Academy of Political Science (AAAPS).

Both articles cite numerous other scholarly sources. These sources range from economic journals, to sports medicine studies, to legal cases, all of which contain an extent of information related to the subject of doping and athletics.

Article 1 was written by Holger Strulik, a professor at the University of Hannover in Germany. Article 2 was written by Nancy Reichman and Ophir Sefiha. Reichman is a professor at the University of Denver, and Sefiha is a professor at Western Carolina University.

Both articles are very complex, and are meant for a well read and educated audience. Both are lengthy, and not easy reads, and are not for just anybody. Article 1 is intended for anyone curious about the pros and cons of doping on a very complex level, whereas article 2 has a more Economic focus.

Both of the articles I found using the JSTOR search engine, then copy and pasted the title of the articles into Google to find PDF versions of both.

Evaluation of General Sources

One of the recent controversies that is related to Physiology, directly or indirectly, has to do with Chris Froome, a cyclist in the Tour De France, and extensive data on his bodily functions during the race. In this blog post I will look at two articles on the issue, one from The New York Times, and the other from The Science of Sport, and will evaluate their credibility.

Mdlsoft. "Cycling." 09/15/13 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

The URL of The New York Times is .com, as is the URL of The Science of Sport, suggesting that they are just normal websites, and not organizations, universities, or government owned domains. This does not discredit either article, but does not add to their credibility.

The author of The New York Times’ article is Ian Austen, who has written around 2,500 articles for the New York Times, starting in 1998. Because of his longstanding and experienced career, Ian Austen is most likely a credible author. The author of The Science of Sport’s article is Ross Tucker, who has incredible experience with athletics, as an NFL player and host of an athletic podcast. Because of his extensive sports knowledge, Tucker is most likely a credible author.

Neither article has information about when they were updated, but both are fairly recent articles. 

The purpose of both articles is to bring a controversy and shady situation to the attention of the public. The New York Times is reaching a more broad audience, where The Science of Sport is alerting more of a specific audience of sports fans. However, both the articles are purposed to raise awareness of certain, possibly incriminating, data.

The New York Times has a picture of the cyclist in question, and another picture of a cyclist, but The Science of Sport article has no graphics.

Both articles come at the situation from an informative position. As the issue in question is already controversial, even discussing the evidence is hinting at foul play by Froome, but there are no overbearing biases or accusations from either article.

The New York Times article links footage of the race discussed, as compared to a past race, and also has links to information on key ideas mentioned in the article. The Science of Sport article has links to more content on the Tour De France and Cycling.

Once again, I learned from Lauren and Jon's blog posts that I have a lot to learn and to implement into my own work. First off, I need to find ways to make my controversy more relatable to more people, as right now it is pretty specific, and limited to a smaller audience. Second, there are many more stylistic things I can work in to my blog in general. Color coordination, clearer organization, and better heading will help my posts to be easier to read.

My Discipline

I currently am in the Physiology program at University of Arizona. The second most popular program at U of A, Physiology entails a great deal. In this blog post, I will try to explain what exactly the Physiology program at U of A covers, and what about it made it interesting to me.

Gustavorezende. "Anatomical Heart." 08/07/13 via Clipart. Public Domain Dedication License.

The primary focus of Physiology at University of Arizona, is learning how the human body works and functions. As with a typical Physiology program, students learn about different bodily functions, system by system. What makes the Physiology program at U of A unique however, is that there is no Pre-Med program at U of A, and the Physiology program essentially is the Pre-Med program.

For this reason, most of the Physiology students at U of A apply to med school and become some form of doctor. If not, Physiology can lead on to becoming a physical therapist, pharmacist, and various other professions.

The numerous options of Physiology are what drew me to this major. Right now my plan is to go on to med school, but I’m still not 100% that is what I want to do, and the various options of Physiology are perfect for me. As I’m not strictly in a Pre-Med program, if, along the line, I decide I do not want to be a doctor, I can still be a pharmacist, or go into physical therapy, among other options.

Ludmil Alexandrov is one of the most influential people in Physiology currently due to his research on mutation and strides against cancer. The FDA, or the US Food and Drug administration, has always been a huge part of Physiology and careers that it leads too.

In 2014 the leading journals in Physiology were, from #1-#3, Physiological Reviews, Annual Review of Plant Biology, and Cell Metabolism. 




After reading Jon and Austin's posts, I realized 2 things. One is that getting involved with people outside of my major and figuring out exactly what else is out there is very important to my collegiate success, because none of my academic decisions are set in stone yet. Second I learned some writing tips about how to be more organized in my Blog posts, and to always read my posts carefully before posting them.