Understanding Rhetoric on the Internet

Stephen Toulmin was a British philosopher, author, and educator who sought to understand the analysis of moral reasoning. The Toulmin model was later found to be useful for the analysis of of rhetorical arguments. Rhetoric, or the art of persuasive speaking, is one of those classes that you notice existing in college, but never really think of again. But maybe you should. Understanding arguments can be helpful not only in such cases as making a great presentation at work, but can also help you decipher others arguments so the wrong ones don't pull you in. Being good at persuasive speaking can help get you that raise. And understanding the building blocks of arguments can help you defend yourself against them.

Of course a great example of the need for understanding and analyzing arguments is the internet. I know you have seen thousand of posts on Facebook that people have reposted without checking the facts of the claim. And if you've browsed any forum at all you've seen the thousands of arguments and counter arguments in the comment section, and sadly many of these arguments can't even hold water. There are a plethora of weak arguments out there on the internet without any evidence at all. And there are others whose facts aren't actually facts. Many of these you can tell are false just from personal knowledge or quickly googling the stated evidence. But it is when the evidence seems good that understanding the building blocks of arguments can really come in handy to understand the flaw that you suspect might be there.

And, who knows, maybe understanding and making solid arguments will become your thing, and you will be the one that no one can out argue in the comment section. But just a piece of advice, the best persuaders will be believed to have the readers interests at heart. So while you're building up your rhetoric, build up your ethos as well.

Basics of the Toulmin Model
In any good argument the reason should not only support the claim, but it should be built on solid assumptions(warrents), as well as having solid evidence to back it up. There are two other parts to Toulmin's model those being qualifiers, that which limits or clarifies the claim, and rebuttals in anticipation of counter arguments.

Learning of Online Interviews

I'd like to think that interviews in many ways support Walter Fisher's Narrative Paradigm that believes that all meaningful communication is a form of storytelling. This is almost more true when having an online interview. For in an online interview, it is you who are setting the stage, choosing your background, and working to tell the most compelling story you can.

Interviews aren't the great joy of my life. I tend to go mind blank at the strangest time. And the amount of tension in my body is phenomenal. Unless I can distract myself I also tend to go into hyperventilation. But my recent experience with an online interviewing teaching aid makes me wonder if online interviewing might not be an answer to many of my problems. While using this online technology on a mock interview for a class I was taking I found that I found talking to a camera to be much easier that talking to real people. But I do wonder how much of what I learned from the experience would actually apply in a situation where I am doing a live video conference, such as with using Skype where there is an actual person on the other side of your screen.

Using the online interview technology allowed me to easily work on my flow and positive demeanor. I loved how I could reshoot when I flubbed my lines, or when I heard how a pause was affecting my delivery I could instantly reassess what I was saying. This was one of the best, and most helpful parts of the experience. However, I never was happy with the lighting I achieved, and this is something I will definitely have to work on in the future. I also was unfortunately unable to get my android tablet to access the program used on the site, so I had to borrow another computer with video capability, but that worked out okay for this instance. I was surprised that I enjoyed the format of the interview as much as I did.

Overall this online interview training was fairly positive and I feel that I was able to use it fairly easily to tell the story that needed to be told. I was able to set the stage, and tell the lines with more control online that typically possible in face-to-face. So if you have thought of the possibility of having an online interview in your future, I would suggest setting the stage, and learning the technology variables so you too might tell the best story that you can, in this small portion of your life story.

What is Truth in the Media

Is public argument truth? Does it encompass that which is true or in accordance with fact or reality. Well it would depend on whose reality you wanted to go with. The online article "We are indeed less willing to agree on what constitutes truth" by Clay Shirky addresses Shirky's beliefs that "the Internet allows us to see what other people actually think" and then proceeds to foretell our future.

Can the internet allow us to see what people think? In general I would say yes, people are posting their thoughts, their beliefs, and sometimes their rage. But it really depends, both on the person who is posting (some are good at hiding their thoughts) and on the readers perception (some people can't see their way out of a paper bag).

The internet is truly filled with information. Today you can easily find the average weight of a female chimpanzee, or reviews of restaurants in a nearby town. The amount of factual information that is available to us today at the touch of our fingers is amazing. And even the infamous comment section, be it on youtube, or a news site, can hold gems, great historical debates, a statement that props up your flagging belief in the good of humanity, or just those that reaffirm your belief that society is doomed.

But what of "objective" media in an online world? The truth is that it is still a work in progress. I agree that we can't go back to how it was back in the day of Walter Cronkite. But as I see it we don't yet have a clear view on where we want to go. I don't believe as Shirky does that the new media needs to be "more willing to attack other outlets for ethical lapses in public", but I do believe they need to have a set of ethics. And I believe more and more people are becoming aware of a new need for the people who are making our online news sites or informative blogs to learn to understand information credibility and accept their role as todays journalist with the accompanying journalist ethics (Bartlett).

But will tomorrow's media and news really be a dog eat dog world were only the most factual and ruthless will thrive? I sure hope not.

Resources:

• Bartlett, Jamie. "The Strengths and Weakness of Social Media." Audio blog post. Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism. University of Oxford, 9 September 2013. http://podcasts.ox.ac.uk/strengths-and-weaknesses-social-media. 19 October 2016.
• Shirky, Clay. "We are indeed less willing to agree on what constitutes truth." The Poynter Institute. 17 October 2012. http://www.poynter.org/news/mediawire/191757/shirky-we-are-indeed-less-willing-to-agree-on-what-constitutes-truth/. Accessed 24 October 2016.

To Speak Online

Have you ever tried to communicate to someone only non-verbally? It is often very frustrating as you're just not understood. And even when they understand your non-verbal answer they'll still try and demand a verbal response. So why do many theorists of the quality of online communication think that the lack of non-verbal cues makes online communication a poor, and maybe detrimental substitute for face-to-face communication?

Let me introduce you to professor Joseph Walther who in 1992 came up with the Social Information Processing Theory. His theory is that people adapt to the restrictions of the online medium by looking for clues in the language people use as well as adapting their emotional and social expressions to the language they have available, although it might take longer (Griffin). Check out this great interview with him on Youtube. I found his thoughts and replies to be well thought out and admired his ability to not get herded somewhere he wasn't intending to go with his theory. He also, when asked about the danger of the internet, said that the internet is like a big city in it's content and diversity, and you should approach it with the same caution as you would a big city (Griffin). A very apt description.

As we more and more use online communication, also known as computer mediated communication (CMC), I believe that it is self evident that people are adapting to learn and create new ways to effectively communicate without the non-verbal component. And despite my earlier comments I do think non-verbal communication is very important, just not absolutely necessary. People are learning all sorts of ways to communicate effectively. There are emoticons as well as the various abbreviated messaging shortcuts, using more direct questions (Child, 118), and even just learning to construct really good sentences and thoughts. The written word has been with us for a long time, and I think it is good to see it evolving into importance again, although we may not always be comfortable with evolution's chosen direction.

Also, look into Walther's Hyperpersonal Model which "has changed the way communication theorists think about CMC" (Child, 119).

References:

• Child, Jeffrey, et al. Experience Communication. McGraw Hill Education, 2014.
• Griffin, Em. "Joseph Walther on Social Information Processing Theory." YouTube, uploaded by A First Look at Communication Theory,29 January 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rOXbYj0I1cE.

What We Say Online

It is true that in online social media I have those few friends who choose to go the extra mile in telling bits of their life. From a taste for tasteless but funny memes, to a few paragraphs from a book being written, to someone's personal struggles, to poetic spouting, to intricate word snapshots of the couples one is marrying that day. To be honest it is these people that keep me engaged in social media sites.

In any relationship, whether it is online or in person, you should always be aware of what and how much you are saying. You should understand the repercussions that can happen by giving too much information to the wrong person. And just like you don't talk smack about someone (like say your boss) where the wrong person might overhear, you should be aware that the same is true of the internet. Most sites on the internet are not private and you should never treat them like they are. You need to pay attention and monitor yourself. "Self-monitoring usually makes people more competent communicators because it enables them to see how their behavior fits or doesn’t fit in a given social setting" (Floyd, 27).

But how much is too much? You can read a lot out there saying how social media is not the place for such public disclosers. But I read part of a fascinating article by Alex Lambert who made a case for "public" intimacy. For getting away from the constrained view where intimate relationships only existed in the home or family sphere, and take it back to Aristotle's ethics where intimacy becomes part of your civic interaction, "because a civic order, a “city”, is above all a network of friends" (Lambert 28). I think there is a lot of truth in this statement.

I personally function best with general reciprocity, that is giving with no expectation of an equal or immediate return (which in American culture you supposedly find in families and not much elsewhere). So I post the types of things I would like to know. I will often post short snippets of my day, things I made or did, or bits of philosophical questions. But I am always asking questions about my online posts. Will I be upset if some unknown person finds this out? Will this come back to bite me? Only you can answer these questions for yourself, and yes sometimes you will get it wrong. But that happens in any friendship. And ultimately you have to make the decisions of what parts of your life you will tell.

References:

• Floyd, Kory. Interpersonal Communication. McGraw-Hill Education, 2012.
• Lambert, Alex. Intimacy and Friendship on Facebook. Macmillan Publishers, 2013.

Thoughts on the Little Mermaid

Disney's The Little Mermaid is many things to many people, especially once you start looking at the gender issues in the film. For some it is the belief of dreaming for the impossible, an obvious dominant theme of the movie, and one needed for women in our current age where they are striving to be a real part of the world around us. For others they see the many gender based portrayals, themes, and stereotypes. And you may not realize it, but there are as many for the male gender as for the female gender. For feminism to succeed, all our current and future understandings of gender roles must be considered and addressed.

The main plot of The Little Mermaid advocates following your dreams, however impossible they may seem, and it is one of the movie's best contributions to modern culture. Though the thought may have originally come from Walt Disney (who believed that anything is possible) (Williams, 48), it has now been passed down to one little mermaid, a girl. This is an important step forward in our strides toward gender equality. Although, even though it is being acknowledged that women too can dream for the impossible, there are inevitably still boundaries being placed on these dreams by those around them (and not just by men). However, as the inclusion of it in this movie shows, these boundaries are definitely loosening up. More women are able to dream the impossible than ever before, but what are they going to dream for?

The typical dream for people of the female gender, as shown in the movie The Little Mermaid, is one that feminists have complained about the narrowness of for some time. That is the dream of falling in love and marrying. Even so Ariel had to give up much to follow this circumscribed dream. She gave up her current life, her family, her voice, possibly her friends, and even full access to the world she was longing for (your life being dictated to you by your husband) just to get this new dream of love. But as Luara Sells pointed out in "Where Do the Mermaids Stand?", through this process Ariel also gains a richer, less innocent understanding of being a woman, one where the constrains of the female gender are recognized to be a performance through her interaction with Ursula (Sells, Conclusion), thus possibly helping us towards loosening these stifling gender roles that constrict us all in narrow sections of behavior and possibilities, and maybe even expanding our dreams.

Now to speak about one of the areas that is most lacking in the film, male gender roles. Especially that of fathers. Ariel's father is one who is selfish, dictates other's lives, and thinks nothing of rages where he destroys much around him. He believes this is fine in dealing with his daughter because he really does love her (even though he has never tried to understand her). Why is it that this archaic model for a father has not been addressed more? Could it be like Giroux states that we are viewing children as a problem and not an asset (Giroux, Ch.1 The Eclipse of Childhood Innocence) perhaps to keep from admitting our culpability in their outcome by not seeing or treating them as human beings for most of their young life? If our children are acknowledged as being fellow human beings, instead of a little me that I get to shape and mold or just ignore, what freedoms and understandings might we discover. But instead we create male gender roles that teach our young males that they can never understand women, and thus are giving tacit permission to never try, therefore negating the voice of half of the population. What new understandings should we be creating in our male gender roles instead?

In so many ways a true freedom for all of us from the slavery derived from our current gender system will not be ours until we address our current gender definitions. They must be deprived of unhealthy stereotypes and differences, and be supplied with new language, expectations and basic equalities. Our gender roles and understandings, both male and female, must be created anew to get the freedom we truly desire.

References

• Williams, Pat and Jim Denney. How to Be Like Walt: Capturing the Disney Magic Every Day of Your Life. Dearfield Beach: Health Communications, Inc., 2004. Google Books.
• Sells, Laura. "Where Do the Mermaids Stand?: Voice and Body in the Little Mermaid" From Mouse to Mermaid: The Politics of Film, Gender and Culture. Eds. Elizabeth Bell, Lynda Haas and Laura Sells. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995. Kindle Edition.
• Giroux, Henry A. and Grace Pollock. Mouse that Roared : Disney and the End of Innocence. Blue Ridge Summit: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2010. Kindle Edition.