Interactivity Audio Script

(In coffee shop with recorder for podcast in the middle of table.)

Rashmi: Hello Mr. Jenkins! It’s wonderful to have you here with us today.

Jenkins: Oh, the pleasure is all mine.

Rashmi: So, Mr. Jenkins, the title of your paper is “Interactive Audience.” Tell us a little bit about how you define “interactive” at least in relation to the concept of audience. It almost seems a little counterintuitive.

(shifting in chair)

Jenkins: Well, our traditional sense of the audience is the consumer of something, of a certain production that is unfolding before them. Interactive means that the audience is now a participant of that action that is taking place on the stage so to speak.

Rashmi: Interesting…so even though audience and interactive are almost mutually exclusive, at least when we first think about it, what you’re saying is there is a way to watch something and be a part of what is being watched at the same time.

Jenkins: Exactly. Now you’re probably wondering how this makes any logical sense. Well, when we look at the new media environment, both a combination of more critically aware spectators and enhanced do-it-yourself media technologies essentially enable the public to exert a heavier influence on what media is circulated.

Rashmi: Okay. Well thank you so much for that wonderful explanation!

Jenkins: You are certainly welcome.

(clanking of cup being placed down)

Defining Cyberspace and Changing Perspectives

It's true that the Internet has become an immense tool for the average person to use to his or her advantage. Especially with the variety of applications that allow for do-it-yourself usage of media such as YouTube, Facebook (and other social media), and blogging sites, anyone can publicize anything at anytime and anywhere to the world. In fact, Jenkin's essay examines the role this sort of "public" media that cyberspace allows for with regards to the traditional corporate structure of mass media and concludes that cyberspace is essentially "fandom writ large."

Even before Web 2.0 (as defined by Grossman in his article "Time's Person of the Year") existed as it is now known, the Internet literally was a place for contributions to forums relating to different interests. Going along with the intuition of cyberspace being "fandom," the website fanfiction.net is a prime example of how everyday average fans of different forms of media, from movies to games, anime to manga, create and share literary creativity amongst each other. Jenkin's essay was clearly referring to this sort of "Fan communities" being "long defined [by] their memberships through affinities..." (Jenkins 158) even during early web usage. Further examples of the fandom generated by the internet include websites dedicated to celebrities, sports, and entertainment, and organizations of social/political causes. With such forums and communities forming a large part of the function served by the Internet, I can really understand what Jenkins means by defining cyberspace along these lines.

However, there are certain key aspects of cyberspace that I feel to go against this grain of thought. The Internet also largely serves as an information database as well as a commercial center. Researchers of varying backgrounds and purposes can find a plethora of reliable (amongst not-so-reliable) knowledge and data. Furthermore, the level of commerce that occurs in cyberspace, as evident by websites such as Amazon and eBay, highlights a changing dynamic in consumerism. Being beyond the realm of "fandom," these usages of the Internet signfiy a more practical side of daily life being carried into the world of cyberspace.

What are some other examples by which cyberspace is defined as something other than fandom? Do you agree with the ideas of fandom posted here? Do you have other ideas and/or examples of how cyberspaces embodies the idea of fandom? How do you think that our definition of the Internet and cyberspace influence our perspectives of it?

Hello World...Class Post #1

I am a junior majoring in English and truly appreciate the breadth of topics offered by the department, from your traditional literature analysis, to performance material, to issues of cultural and political relevance today, such as this course in digital rhetoric. In a broad sense, I am very interested in the humanities, but of course more specifically on literature, creative expression, the performing arts, and analyzing the role of culture and critiquing popular notions. My sincerest personal aspiration to learn a variety of classical dance forms from ballet to Middle Eastern to Indian and in the meantime I hope to support myself with a professional career relating to communication, media, and journalism in some form.

I don’t consider myself all that sophisticated technologically (as I tend to have little patience with all things technical), but part of my reason for taking this course is to improve myself somewhat in this area. Even better is that the course focuses on a specifically linguistic and cultural aspect of the digital which certainly makes it more appealing to someone with my background and interests. I feel the biggest advantage I will be getting of this course is the applicability of these skills to the workplace today, especially considering how businesses advertise and communicate more and more through the digital. Honing one’s creative abilities in digital communication would definitely be very marketable in any field.

Arrangement and style are two rhetorical conventions I see most explicitly in Wesch’s video. The arrangement aspect can be seen in the progression where we start with written (nondigital) language being presented and steadily and switch to digital. Progression also includes taking the viewer through a history of digital where web was once written in HTML. Part of the persuasion in favor of digital comes from the style in which each type of text is presented with the former being sloppier or hastier than the latter. This video is very stylistic in the sense that there is a specific artfulness to how the message is being communicated. One example is the typing, highlighting, and deleting of words in no particular order towards the beginning of the video. The video makes use of the flexibility of digital space to present how efficient digital is. As digital rhetoricians, we can definitely use Wesch’s video as a model of creativity when considering how to combine visual and technical elements with the verbal to convey our messages.

Shaping A Political View

http://www.nisleerskov.com/labels/Rhetoric.html

This cartoon focuses directly on rhetoric used in a political context. In the first few panels, the one character uses loaded language/exaggerations to describe the more horrific activities supposedly committed regularly by the countries mentioned. Another interesting point is the fact that these practices are referred to be committed “by” the country and not “within” the country. This makes all the difference when it comes to how one’s political perceptions are shaped regarding these countries. Also, the cartoon plays on the idea of rhetoric by bold-facing certain words such as “typical strategy” and “opposition” as if to imply that choice of words is a very significant factor here.