Digital rhetoric: Difference between revisions
m →Social Issues: changed order of subsections to put 'politics' after 'access' |
mNo edit summary |
||
(463 intermediate revisions by 92 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Forms of communication via digital mediums}} |
|||
{{Technical|date=April 2022}} |
|||
'''Digital rhetoric''' is a way of informing, persuading, and inspiring action in an [[audience]] through [[digital media]] that is composed and distributed via [[multimedia]] platforms.<ref name="Eyman2015">{{Cite book |last=Eyman |first=Douglas |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/book/40755 |title=Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice |date=2015 |publisher=University of Michigan Press |isbn=978-0-472-05268-4 |doi=10.3998/dh.13030181.0001.001}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> Due to the increasingly mediated nature of our contemporary society, there are no longer clear distinctions between digital and non-digital environments. This has led to an expansion of the scope of digital rhetoric as there is a need to account for the increased fluidity with which humans interact with [[technology]].<ref name="Boyle 251–259" /> Contrary to past conceptions, the definition of rhetoric can no longer be confined to simply the sending and receiving of messages to persuade or impart knowledge. While this represents a primarily ancient Western view of rhetoric, Arthur Smith of UCLA explains that the ancient rhetoric of many cultures, such as African rhetoric, existed independent of Western influence.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Smith |first=Arthur L. |date=March 1971 |title=Markings of an African concept of rhetoric |journal=Today's Speech |volume=19 |issue=2 |pages=13–18 |doi=10.1080/01463377109368973}}</ref> Today, [[rhetoric]] encompasses all forms of discourse that serve any given purpose within specific contexts, while also simultaneously being shaped by those contexts.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ge |first=Yunfeng |date=November 2013 |title=Book review: Anis S Bawarshi and Mary Jo Reiff, Genre: An Introduction to History, Theory, Research, and Pedagogy |journal=Discourse & Society |volume=24 |issue=6 |pages=833–835 |doi=10.1177/0957926513490318c |s2cid=147358289}}</ref> |
|||
{{Use mdy dates|date=March 2024}} |
|||
[[File:Digital Rhetoric.jpg|thumb|300x300px|Digital rhetoric is an extension of human communication—taking place in a digital sphere.<ref name="Eyman-2015">{{Cite book|last=Eyman|first=Douglas|url=https://www.fulcrum.org/concern/monographs/qn59q490d|title=Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice|date=2015|publisher=digitalculturebooks|isbn=978-0-472-07268-2|location=Ann Arbor, MI|language=en|doi=10.3998/dh.13030181.0001.001}}</ref>]] |
|||
Existing scholarship in the field suggests that rhetoric and digital rhetoric hold various meanings according to different [[scholar]]s.<ref name="eyman2015">Eyman, Douglas (2015). Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice. University of Michigan Press. {{ISBN|978-0-472-05268-4}}</ref> Based on the individual values a scholar holds, digital rhetoric can be analyzed through many lenses that reflect different [[social movement]]s.{{citation needed|date=February 2021}} Approaching this area of study through different the lens of varying social issues allows the reach of digital rhetoric to expand far beyond the individualistic encounters one has with technology. |
|||
'''Digital rhetoric''' is [[communication]] that exists in the digital sphere. It can be expressed in many different forms, including text, images, videos, and [[software]].<ref name="Eyman2015">{{Cite book|last=Eyman|first=Douglas|url=https://muse.jhu.edu/book/40755|title=Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice|date=2015|publisher=University of Michigan Press|isbn=978-0-472-05268-4|doi=10.3998/dh.13030181.0001.001}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> Due to the increasingly mediated nature of contemporary society, distinctions between digital and non-digital environments are less clear.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Van Den Eede|first1=Yoni|last2=Goeminne|first2=Gert|last3=Van den Bossche|first3=Marc|date=June 2017|title=The Art of Living with Technology: Turning Over Philosophy of Technology's Empirical Turn|journal=Foundations of Science|language=en|volume=22|issue=2|pages=235–246|doi=10.1007/s10699-015-9472-5|s2cid=147446410|issn=1233-1821|doi-access=free}}</ref> This has expanded the scope of digital rhetoric to account for the increased fluidity with which humans interact with [[technology]].<ref name="Boyle 251–259">{{Cite journal|last1=Boyle|first1=Casey|last2=Brown|first2=James J.|last3=Ceraso|first3=Steph|date=May 27, 2018|title=The Digital: Rhetoric Behind and Beyond the Screen|journal=Rhetoric Society Quarterly|volume=48|issue=3|pages=251–259|doi=10.1080/02773945.2018.1454187|s2cid=149842629}}</ref> |
|||
The field of digital rhetoric is not yet fully established. It draws theory and practices from the tradition of [[rhetoric]] as both an analytical tool and a production guide. As a whole, it can be categorized as a meta-discipline.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> |
|||
== Definition == |
|||
Due to evolving study, digital rhetoric has held various meanings to different scholars over time.<ref name="Eyman2015"/> It can take on a variety of meanings based on what is being analyzed, depending on the concept, forms or objects of study, or [[Rhetoric|rhetorical approach]]. Digital rhetoric can also be analyzed through the lenses of different [[social movement]]s.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ridolfo|first=Jim|date=2013|title=Delivering Textual Diaspora: Building Digital Cultural Repositories as Rhetoric Research|journal=College English|volume=76|issue=2|pages=136–151|doi=10.58680/ce201324270 |jstor=24238146|issn=0010-0994}}</ref> |
|||
=== Evolution of the definition of 'Digital Rhetoric' as a term === |
|||
The following subsections detail the evolving definition 'digital rhetoric' as a term since its creation in 1989.<ref name=":33" /> |
|||
Digital rhetoric lacks a strict definition amongst scholars. The discussion and debate toward reaching a definition accounts for much of the writing, study, and teaching of the topic. <ref name="Hodgson & Barnett" /> One of the most straightforward definitions for "digital rhetoric" is that it is the application of rhetorical theory to digital communication.<ref name="Eyman2015"/>{{rp|13}} |
|||
==== Richard A. Lanham (1989 - 2009) ==== |
|||
The term {{em|digital rhetoric}} was coined by [[rhetoric]]ian [[Richard A. Lanham]] in a lecture he delivered in 1989 <ref name=":33">{{Cite web |last=Hodgson & Barnett |date=November 22, 2016 |title=Introduction: What is Rhetorical about Digital Rhetoric? Perspectives and Definitions of Digital Rhetoric |url=http://enculturation.net/what-is-rhetorical-about-digital-rhetoric |url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170427134719/http://enculturation.net:80/what-is-rhetorical-about-digital-rhetoric |archive-date=2017-04-27 }}</ref> and first formally put into words in his 1993 essay collection, ''The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts''.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lanham, R. A. |url=http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/E/bo3661152.html |title=The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=1994 |isbn=978-0-226-46885-3}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> |
|||
== Definition == |
|||
==== Elizabeth Losh (2009 - 2015) ==== |
|||
{{Rhetoric}} |
|||
In 2009, rhetorician [[Elizabeth Losh]]<ref name=":5">{{Cite web|url=http://losh.ucsd.edu/|title=Elizabeth Losh|website=losh.ucsd.edu}}</ref> offered this four-part [[definition]] of digital rhetoric in her book, ''Virtualpolitik'':<ref>{{Cite book |last=Losh, E. |url=http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/virtualpolitik |title=Virtualpolitik |publisher=MIT Press |year=2009 |isbn=978-0-262-12304-4}}</ref> |
|||
# The conventions of new digital [[genre]]s that are used for everyday discourse, as well as for special occasions, in average people's lives. |
|||
# [[Public rhetoric]], often in the form of [[Politics|political]] messages from [[Institution|government institutions]], that is represented or recorded through [[Digital electronics|digital technology]] and [[Dissemination|disseminated]] via [[Electronics|electronically]] distributed [[Computer network|networks]]. |
|||
# The emerging scholarly [[Discipline (academia)|discipline]] concerned with the rhetorical interpretation of computer-generated media as objects of study. |
|||
# Mathematical theories of communication from the field of [[information science]], many of which attempt to quantify the amount of uncertainty in a given [[Linguistics|linguistic]] exchange or the likely paths through which messages travel.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Losh |first=Elizabeth |url=http://gossettphd.org/library/losh_hackingaristotle.pdf |title=Virtualpolitik: An Electronic History of Government Media-Making in a Time of War, Scandal, Disaster, Miscommunication, and Mistakes |date=2009 |publisher=MIT |pages=47–48 |access-date=24 April 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141023101108/http://gossettphd.org/library/losh_hackingaristotle.pdf |archive-date=23 October 2014 |url-status=dead}}</ref> |
|||
=== Precursors to Digital Rhetoric, and Rhetoric in the early Computer Age === |
|||
Losh's definition demonstrates that digital rhetoric is a field that relies on different methods to study various types of information, such as code, text, visuals, videos, and so on.<ref name=":5" /> |
|||
Rhetoric has developed alongside many technological developments, with digital mediums being amongst the most recent and transformative. There are many ancient and historical examples of "machine's to think with." Early examples of devices being used for the purpose of guiding thought include [[Martianus Capella]]'s 9th century glossed collections of prose, philosophy and other writings, and the [[Bible concordance|biblical concordances]] developed by monks between the 12th and 13th century.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=McCarty |first=Willard |date=2023-12-22 |title=Digital rhetoric, literae humaniores and Leibniz's dream |url=https://digitalenlightenmentstudies.org/article/id/5/ |journal=Digital Enlightenment Studies |volume=1 |issue=1 |doi=10.61147/des.5|doi-access=free }}</ref> Some argue that types of man-made artwork and codes, such as ancient [[Egyptian hieroglyphs|Egyptian hieroglyphics]], were some of the first forms of digital rhetoric. <ref name="Eyman2015" /> |
|||
In 1917, [[C. I. Scofield|C.I Scofield]] created an annotated version of the [[King James Version|King James Bible]]. This version of the bible would indicate passages that related to one another throughout both the Old and New Testaments, guiding the reader's interpretation of the work. These "connected topic concordances" are similar to "key-in context concordances" used on modern computers. <ref>{{Cite journal |last=McCarty |first=Willard |date=2023-12-22 |title=Digital rhetoric, literae humaniores and Leibniz's dream |url=https://digitalenlightenmentstudies.org/article/id/5/ |journal=Digital Enlightenment Studies |volume=1 |issue=1 |doi=10.61147/des.5 |issn=3029-0953|doi-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
==== Douglas Eyman (2015 - 2018) ==== |
|||
[[File:ScofieldBible.jpg|left|thumb|The Scofield Bible, which used annotations to explain portions of the text, and relate it to other portions of the book]] |
|||
Drawing influence from Lanham and Losh, Douglas Eyman offered his own definition of digital rhetoric in his 2015 book ''Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice.'' Eyman said digital rhetoric is "...the application of rhetorical theory (as analytic method or [[heuristic]] for production) to digital texts and performances".<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Eyman |first=Douglas |url=https://quod.lib.umich.edu/d/dh/13030181.0001.001/1:5/--digital-rhetoric-theory-method-practice?g=dculture;rgn=div1;view=fulltext;xc=1 |title=Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice |date=2015 |publisher=University of Michigan Press |isbn=978-0-472-05268-4 |language=en |doi=10.3998/dh.13030181.0001.001}}</ref>{{Rp|44}} |
|||
By the 1960s, early computers had become more prominent in many environments, and began seeing application outside of math and science. In 1964, Harvard's Allan B. Ellis published an analysis of how computers could be used to better understand literary works, through having text from ''[[Adventures of Huckleberry Finn|The Adventures of Huckleberry]]'' plugged into punched cards and having the computer analyze the titular character.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ellis |first=Allan B. |date=1964 |title=The Computer and Character Analysis |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/810597 |journal=The English Journal |volume=53 |issue=7 |pages=522–527 |doi=10.2307/810597 |jstor=810597 |issn=0013-8274}}</ref> Between the mid-60's and early 70's, there were several experiments to investigate the potential for computers in the grading of academic papers. These computers were programmed to approximate the way that teachers generally approached the grading process, and judge the content in its quality of vocabulary, composition, and approach to the content. <ref>{{Cite journal |last=Daigon |first=Arthur |date=1966 |title=Computer Grading of English Composition |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/811145 |journal=The English Journal |volume=55 |issue=1 |pages=46–52 |doi=10.2307/811145 |jstor=811145 |issn=0013-8274}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Slotnick |first1=Henry B. |last2=Knapp |first2=John V. |date=1971 |title=Essay Grading by Computer: A Laboratory Phenomenon? |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/813345 |journal=The English Journal |volume=60 |issue=1 |pages=75–87 |doi=10.2307/813345 |jstor=813345 |issn=0013-8274}}</ref> |
|||
=== Evolving definition of 'digital rhetoric' === |
|||
Eyman's definition demonstrates that digital rhetoric can be applied as an analytic method for digital texts and as a heuristic for production offering rhetorical questions that a composer can use to create digital texts.{{Citation needed|date=March 2019}}<ref name=":0" /> Eyman categorized the emerging field of digital rhetoric as [[Interdisciplinarity|interdisciplinary]] in nature, enriched by related fields such as, but not limited to: [[digital literacy]], [[visual rhetoric]], [[new media]], [[Human–computer interaction|human-computer interaction]] and [[critical code studies]].<ref name=":0" /> |
|||
The following subsections detail the evolving definition of 'digital rhetoric' as a term since its creation in 1989.<ref name="Hodgson & Barnett"/> |
|||
==== |
==== Early definitions (1989–2015) ==== |
||
The term {{em|digital rhetoric}} was coined by rhetorician [[Richard A. Lanham]] in a 1989 lecture<ref name="Hodgson & Barnett">{{Cite web |last1=Hodgson|first1=Justin|last2=Barnett |first2=Scot|date=November 22, 2016 |title=Introduction: What is Rhetorical about Digital Rhetoric? Perspectives and Definitions of Digital Rhetoric |url=http://enculturation.net/what-is-rhetorical-about-digital-rhetoric |url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170427134719/http://enculturation.net:80/what-is-rhetorical-about-digital-rhetoric |archive-date=April 27, 2017 }}</ref> and was first published in his 1993 essay collection, ''The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts''.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Lanham|first=R. A. |url=http://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/E/bo3661152.html |title=The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts |publisher=University of Chicago Press |year=1994 |isbn=978-0-226-46885-3}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> Lanham avoided coming to a firm definition, instead aiming to connect digital communication to examples from traditional communication, discussing the relationship between postmodern theory, digital arts, and classical rhetoric. Digital rhetoric theory is primarily based in traditional rhetoric and shares many of its methods and characteristics, including it's status as a meta-discipline. Lanham's work referred to many works of [[Hypertext]] theory. Hypertext theory is a similar, but less broad concept to digital rhetoric, which studied the consequences of computer users interacting with hypertext links. <ref name="Eyman2015" /> Much of the writing on the theory focused on how the meaning that hypertext links gave to words and enforces a relationship between users and the particular words, and how this could be implemented in rhetorical and educational settings. <ref>{{Cite journal |last=Landow |first=George P. |date=June 1989 |title=Hypertext in literary education, criticism, and scholarship |url=http://link.springer.com/10.1007/BF00056142 |journal=Computers and the Humanities |language=en |volume=23 |issue=3 |pages=173–198 |doi=10.1007/BF00056142 |issn=0010-4817}}</ref> |
|||
In 2018, rhetorician Angela Haas offered her own definition of digital rhetoric, defining it as "the digital negotiation of information – and its historical, social, economic, and political contexts and influences – to affect change".<ref name=":31">{{Cite book |last=Haas |first=Angela M. |title=The Routledge Handbook of Digital Writing and Rhetoric |year=2018 |isbn=978-1-315-51849-7 |pages=412–422 |chapter=Toward a Digital Cultural Rhetoric |doi=10.4324/9781315518497-39}}</ref> Haas emphasized the idea that digital rhetoric does not solely apply to text-based items-- it can apply to image-based or system-based items as well. In other words, any form of communication that occurs in the digital sphere can be counted as digital rhetoric under Haas' definition.<ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315518480|title=The Routledge Handbook of Digital Writing and Rhetoric|date=2018-04-27|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-315-51849-7|editor-last=Alexander|editor-first=Jonathan|edition=1|language=en|doi=10.4324/9781315518497|editor-last2=Rhodes|editor-first2=Jacqueline}}</ref> |
|||
In 1997, [[University of Calgary|Calgary University]] professor Doug Brent expanded on the concept of hypertext theory, approaching the topic from a rhetorical framework, when past studies depended more on literary analysis. This presented hypertext as a kind of "new rhetoric".<ref name="Eyman2015" /><ref>{{Cite web |last=Brent |first=Doug |date=Spring 1997 |title=Rhetorics of the Web |url=https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/2.1/features/brent/bridge.html |access-date=2024-10-09 |website=kairos.technorhetoric.net}}</ref> The same year, [[Bowling Green State University|Bowling Green University]] scholar Gary Heba united studies of hypertext and visual rhetoric into the concept of "HyperRhetoric", a multimedia communication experience that could not be replicated outside of an internet setting. Heba stated that as the online landscape and the perspectives of users change, HyperRhetoric must also adapt and evolve. This fluidity remains a characteristic of digital rhetoric.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Heba |first=Gary |date=January 1997 |title=HyperRhetoric: Multimedia, literacy, and the future of composition |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S8755461597900360 |journal=Computers and Composition |language=en |volume=14 |issue=1 |pages=19–44 |doi=10.1016/S8755-4615(97)90036-0}}</ref><ref name="Eyman2015" /> |
|||
==== Other Definitions ==== |
|||
Some scholars interpret this concept with greater focus on the digital aspect. Casey Boyle, James Brown Jr., and Steph Ceraso claim that "the digital" is no longer just one of the many different tools that can be used to enhance traditional [[rhetoric]], but an "ambient condition" that encompasses our everyday lives. In other words, as technology becomes more and more ubiquitous, the lines between traditional and digital rhetoric will start to blur. In addition, Boyle et al. emphasize the idea that both technology and rhetoric can influence and transform each other.<ref name="Boyle 251–259" /> |
|||
The late 1990s and early 2000s represented a greater shift towards rhetoric in digital communication study, and how "persuasion" functions in an online setting.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> In 2005, [[Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute]] scholar James P. Zappen expanded the conversation beyond persuasion and into digital rhetoric's capacity for creative expression in exploring the behavior of individuals and groups in online settings.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Zappen |first=James P. |date=July 2005 |title=Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15427625tcq1403_10 |journal=Technical Communication Quarterly |language=en |volume=14 |issue=3 |pages=319–325 |doi=10.1207/s15427625tcq1403_10 |s2cid=54783060 |issn=1057-2252}}</ref> |
|||
=== Definition of 'Digital Rhetoric' as a field of study === |
|||
Additionally, digital rhetoric is a tool by which different cultures can continue to facilitate their longstanding cultural traditions. In his book, ''Digital Griots: African American Rhetoric in a Multimedia Age'', Adam Banks states that modern day storytellers, like stand-up comics and spoken word poets, give African American rhetoric a flexible approach that is still true to tradition.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Banks |first=Adam J |title=Digital griots: African American rhetoric in a multimedia age |date=2011 |publisher=Southern Illinois University Press |isbn=978-0-8093-3020-1 |oclc=977841399}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> |
|||
==== Recent scholarship (2015–present) ==== |
|||
While digital rhetoric can be used to facilitate traditions, select cultures face several practical application issues. [[Radhika Gajjala]], professor at the [[University of Pittsburgh]], writes that South Asian cyber feminists face issues with regards to building their web presence.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gajjala |first=Radhika |date=March 2003 |title=South Asian digital diasporas and cyberfeminist webs: negotiating globalization, nation, gender and information technology design |journal=Contemporary South Asia |volume=12 |issue=1 |pages=41–56 |doi=10.1080/0958493032000123362 |s2cid=143325390}}</ref> |
|||
In his 2015 book ''Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice,'' Douglas Eyman defined digital rhetoric as "the application of rhetorical theory (as analytic method or [[heuristic]] for production) to digital texts and performances".<ref name="Eyman2015" />{{Rp|44}} |
|||
By this definition, digital rhetoric can be applied as an analytic method for digital content and be a basis for future study, offering rhetorical questions as research guidelines.<ref name="Eyman2015"/>{{Rp|12, 44}} Eyman categorized the emerging field of digital rhetoric as [[Interdisciplinarity|interdisciplinary]] in nature, related to fields like: [[digital literacy]], [[visual rhetoric]], [[new media]], [[human–computer interaction]], [[critical code studies]], and a variety of many more.<ref name="Eyman2015" />{{rp|44}} |
|||
==Forms and Objects of Study== |
|||
In 2018, rhetorician Angela Haas offered her own definition of digital rhetoric, defining it as "the digital negotiation of information – and its historical, social, economic, and political contexts and influences – to affect change".<ref name="Haas 2018">{{Cite book |last=Haas |first=Angela M. |title=The Routledge Handbook of Digital Writing and Rhetoric |year=2018 |isbn=978-1-315-51849-7 |pages=412–422 |chapter=Toward a Digital Cultural Rhetoric |doi=10.4324/9781315518497-39}}</ref> Haas emphasized that digital rhetoric does not solely apply to text-based items—it can also apply to image-based or system-based items. In this way, any form of communication that occurs in the digital sphere can be counted as digital rhetoric. <ref>{{Cite book|url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9781315518480|title=The Routledge Handbook of Digital Writing and Rhetoric|date=April 27, 2018|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-315-51849-7|editor-last=Alexander|editor-first=Jonathan|edition=1|language=en|doi=10.4324/9781315518497|editor2-last=Rhodes|editor2-first=Jacqueline}}</ref> |
|||
=== Social media === |
|||
[[Social media]] allows for the weaving of "offline and online communities into integrated movements".<ref name="Olson 772–787">{{Cite journal |last=Carter Olson |first=Candi |date=2 September 2016 |title=#BringBackOurGirls: digital communities supporting real-world change and influencing mainstream media agendas |journal=Feminist Media Studies |volume=16 |issue=5 |pages=772–787 |doi=10.1080/14680777.2016.1154887}}</ref> Digital activism serves an agenda-setting function as it can influence mainstream media and news outlets. [[Hashtag]]s, which curate posts with similar themes and ideas into a central location on a digital platform, bring exposure to social and political issues. They put pressure on private institutions and governments to address these issues, as can be seen with movements like #CripTheVote,<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Mann |first=Benjamin W |date=1 December 2018 |title=Rhetoric of Online Disability Activism: #CripTheVote and Civic Participation |journal=Communication, Culture and Critique |volume=11 |issue=4 |pages=604–621 |doi=10.1093/ccc/tcy030}}</ref> #BringBackOurGirls,<ref name="Olson 772–787" /> or [[Me Too movement|#MeToo]]. Many recent social movements have originated on [[Twitter]], as Twitter Topic Networks provide a framework for online community organizing.<ref name="Olson 772–787" /> |
|||
In 2023, scholars Zoltan P. Majdik and S. Scott Graham considered not only the rhetorical landscape of artificial intelligence but what it might mean to use artificial intelligence as a resource for rhetorical scholarship. The authors posit a dual perspective on AI—first, as a rapidly developing technology that will have profound effects on human communication, and second, as an object of study for communication scholars who might want to consider using AI in the same way they might consider using any other resource or technology.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Majdik |first1=Zoltan P. |last2=Graham |first2=S. Scott |date=2024-05-26 |title=Rhetoric of/with AI: An Introduction |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02773945.2024.2343264 |journal=Rhetoric Society Quarterly |language=en |volume=54 |issue=3 |pages=222–231 |doi=10.1080/02773945.2024.2343264 |issn=0277-3945}}</ref> |
|||
=== Mobile applications === |
|||
In 2024, Penn State rhetorician Stuart A. Selber defined digital rhetoric studies through a selection of guiding questions: |
|||
[[Mobile app]]lications are computer programs designed specifically for mobile devices, such as phones or tablets. Mobile applications cater to a wide range of audiences and needs. There are apps for social media, employment, education, etc. Mobile apps allow for a "cultural hybridity of habit" which allows anyone to stay connected with anyone, anywhere.<ref name=":12">{{Cite book |last=Verhulsdonck |first=Gustav |title=Digital Rhetoric and Global Literacies |year=2014 |isbn=978-1-4666-4916-3 |series=Advances in Linguistics and Communication Studies |pages=1–40 |chapter=Digital Rhetoric and Globalization |doi=10.4018/978-1-4666-4916-3.ch001}}</ref> Due to this, there is always access to changing cultures and lifestyles, since there are so many different apps available to research or publish work.<ref name=":12" /> Furthermore, mobile apps allow individual users to manage many aspects of their lives while allowing the apps themselves to be able to continue to largely change and upgrade socially.<ref>{{Cite thesis |last=Rose |first=Jessica |title=The Rhetoric of the iPhone: A Cultural Gateway Of Our Transforming Digital Paradigm |date=12 August 2016 |url=https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/english_theses/205/ |oclc=956496762 |journal=English Theses}}</ref> |
|||
# How does traditional rhetoric inform the study of digital communication as a rhetorical medium? |
|||
=== Online communities === |
|||
# When traditional rhetoric fails to inform scholars in a situation exclusive to digital formats, are new concepts required or can traditional concepts be reconsidered? |
|||
[[Online communities]] are groups of people with a common interest that interact and engage over the Internet. Many online communities are found within social networking sites, online forums, and chat rooms, such as [[Facebook]], [[Twitter]], [[Reddit]], [[4chan]], etc., where members can share and discuss information and inquiries.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Plant |first=Robert |date=January 2004 |title=Online communities |journal=Technology in Society |volume=26 |issue=1 |pages=51–65 |doi=10.1016/j.techsoc.2003.10.005}}</ref> These online spaces often establish their own rules, norms, and culture, and in some cases, users will adopt community-specific terminology or phrases. |
|||
# If new ideas are needed, what will be their source? How will they be examples of rhetoric? <ref name="Selber-2024">{{Cite journal |last1=Selber |first1=Stuart A. |last2=Ridolfo |first2=Jim |date=2024-04-15 |title=Stuart A. Selber: What is Digital Rhetoric? |url=https://journals.openedition.org/aad/8357 |journal=Argumentation et Analyse du Discours |volume=32 |language=en |issue=32 |doi=10.4000/aad.8357 |issn=1565-8961|doi-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
Selber stated that a concept is rhetorical if it helps in analyzing how speakers use the circumstances of society and their message's medium to influence the opinions of others.<ref name="Selber-2024" /> |
|||
Scholars have noted that online communities have especially gained prominence among users like e-patients and victim-survivors of [[abuse]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Arduser |first=Lora |date=January 2011 |title=Warp and Weft: Weaving the Discussion Threads of an Online Community |journal=Journal of Technical Writing and Communication |volume=41 |issue=1 |pages=5–31 |doi=10.2190/TW.41.1.b |s2cid=144656923}}</ref> Within online health and support groups respectively, members have been able to find others who share similar experiences, receive advice and emotional support, and record their own narrative.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=O'Neill |first=Tully |date=1 March 2018 |title='Today I Speak': Exploring How Victim-Survivors Use Reddit |journal=International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=44–59 |doi=10.5204/ijcjsd.v7i1.402 |doi-access=free}}</ref> However, online communities also face issues with online harassment in the form of [[Internet troll|trolling]], [[cyberbullying]], and [[hate speech]].{{citation needed|date=July 2021}} According to the Pew Research Center, 41% of Americans have experienced some form of online harassment with 75% of these experiences occurring over social media.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2021-01-13 |title=The State of Online Harassment |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/01/13/the-state-of-online-harassment/ |access-date=2021-03-02 |website=Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech |language=en-US}}</ref> |
|||
=== Other definitions === |
|||
Another area of concern is the influence of algorithms on delineating the online communities a user can come in contact with. Personalizing algorithms can tailor a user's experience to their analytically-determined preference, creating a "[[filter bubble]]". The user loses agency in content accessibility and information dissemination.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gallagher |first=John R. |date=September 2017 |title=Writing for Algorithmic Audiences |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=45 |pages=25–35 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2017.06.002}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Adams |first=Heather Brook |last2=Applegarth |first2=Risa |last3=Simpson |first3=Amber Hester |date=September 2020 |title=Acting with Algorithms: Feminist Propositions for Rhetorical Agency |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=57 |page=102581 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2020.102581}}</ref> |
|||
While most research represents a traditionally Western view of rhetoric, Arthur Smith of [[University of California, Los Angeles|UCLA]] explains that the ancient rhetoric of many cultures, such as African rhetoric, existed independent of Western influence, and developed in ways that reflect the values and functions of those societies.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Smith|first=Arthur L.|date=March 1971|title=Markings of an African concept of rhetoric|journal=Today's Speech|volume=19|issue=2|pages=13–18|doi=10.1080/01463377109368973}}</ref> Today, rhetoric encompasses all forms of discourse that serve any given purpose within specific contexts, while also being shaped by those contexts.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ge|first=Yunfeng|date=November 2013|title=Book review: Anis S Bawarshi and Mary Jo Reiff, Genre: An Introduction to History, Theory, Research, and Pedagogy|journal=Discourse & Society|volume=24|issue=6|pages=833–835|doi=10.1177/0957926513490318c|s2cid=147358289}}</ref> |
|||
Some scholars interpret this rhetorical discourse with greater focus on the digital aspect. [[University of Texas at Austin|University of Texas]]'s Casey Boyle, [[Rutgers University–Camden|Rutgers University-Camden]]'s James Brown Jr., and [[University of Virginia]]'s Steph Ceraso claim that "the digital" is no longer a single strategy that can be used to enhance traditional rhetoric, but an "ambient condition" that encompass all parts of life.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Boyle |first1=Casey |last2=Brown |first2=James J. |last3=Ceraso |first3=Steph |date=May 27, 2018 |title=The Digital: Rhetoric Behind and Beyond the Screen |journal=Rhetoric Society Quarterly |volume=48 |issue=3 |pages=251–259 |doi=10.1080/02773945.2018.1454187 |s2cid=149842629 |issn=0277-3945}}</ref> As technology has become more ubiquitous, the lines between traditional and digital rhetoric have blurred. Technology and rhetoric can influence and transform each other. <ref name="Boyle 251–259" /> |
|||
=== Video games === |
|||
[[File:Xbox-360-Pro-wController.jpg|thumb|126x126px|An Xbox 360 Pro used to play video games]] |
|||
The procedural and interactive nature of [[video game]]s leads them to be rich examples of [[procedural rhetoric]].<ref name=":26">{{Cite web |title=Procedural Rhetorics - Rhetoric's Procedures: Rhetorical Peaks and What It Means to Win the Game {{!}} Currents in Electronic Literacy |url=https://currents.dwrl.utexas.edu/2010/king_procedural_rhetorics_rhetorics_procedures.html |access-date=2021-02-24 |website=currents.dwrl.utexas.edu}}</ref> This rhetoric can range from games designed to bolster children's learning to challenging one's assumptions of the world around them.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Frossard |first=Frédérique |title=Video Games and Creativity |last2=Trifonova |first2=Anna |last3=Barajas |first3=Mario |year=2015 |isbn=978-0-12-801462-2 |pages=159–183 |chapter=Teachers Designing Learning Games |doi=10.1016/b978-0-12-801462-2.00008-4}}</ref> Each game has its own set of language which help shape the way information is transferred between players in the community.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://blog.activision.com/|title=COD 101: Definitions of Common Call of Duty®: Modern Warfare® Terms|website=blog.activision.com}}</ref> With the popularization of [[Online game|online gaming]], games such as [[Call of Duty]], [[League of Legends]], and many more, players have gained to communicate with one another to create their own rhetoric within the established world of the game which allows players to influence and be influenced by the other gamers around them.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Vorderer |first=Peter |title=Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses, and Consequences. |last2=Bryant |first2=Jennings |date=2012 |publisher=Taylor and Francis |isbn=978-0-203-87370-0 |oclc=847370576}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> |
|||
== Concepts == |
|||
An educational video game developed for students at the [[University of Texas at Austin]], titled ''Rhetorical Peaks'', was made with the goal of examining rhetoric's procedural nature and to capture the constantly changing contexts of rhetoric.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Rhetorical Peaks: A Design for Teaching Rhetoric in a Gaming Environment {{!}} Welcome to the DWRL |url=https://www.dwrl.utexas.edu/old/content/rhetorical-peaks-design.html |access-date=2021-03-03 |website=www.dwrl.utexas.edu}}</ref><ref name=":26" /> The [[Nonlinear gameplay|open-ended]] nature of the game as well as the developer's intent on playing the game within a classroom setting encouraged collaboration among students and for them to develop their own interpretations on the game's plot based on vague clues, ultimately helping them to realize that there must be a willingness to change between lines of thought and to work within and past limits in understanding rhetoric.<ref name=":26" /> |
|||
===Circulation=== |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-en 6m articles 270 white.png|alt=Wikipedia's globe logo with a red banner across the bottom that says, "6,000,000 articles", and below that Wikipedia's motto, "The free encyclopedia".|thumb|As an example of circulation, Wikipedia is an online encyclopedia that relies on collaborative rhetorical contribution.]] |
|||
[[Rhetorical circulation|Circulation]] theorizes the ways that text and discourse moves through time and space, and any kind of media can be circulated. A new form of communication is composed, created, and distributed through digital technologies. Media scholar [[Henry Jenkins]] explains there is a shift from distribution to circulation, which signals a move toward an increasingly participatory model of culture in which people shape, share, re-frame, and remix media content in ways not previously possible within the traditional rhetorical formats like print. <ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Jenkins |first1=Henry |last2=Lashley |first2=Mark C. |last3=Creech |first3=Brian |title=Voices for a New Vernacular: A Forum on Digital Storytelling Interview with Henry Jenkins |url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ufh&AN=126812920&site=ehost-live&scope=site |journal=International Journal of Communication |volume=11 |pages=1061–1068 |via=EBSCOhost}}</ref> The various concepts of circulation include: |
|||
* ''Collaboration'' – Digital rhetoric has taken on a very collaborative nature through the use of digital platforms. Sites such as YouTube and Wikipedia involve opportunity for "new forms of collaborative production".<ref name="Wittke & Hanekop">{{cite book|editor-last=Wittke|editor-first=Volker|editor-first2= Heidemarie|editor-last2=Hanekop|title=New Forms of Collaborative Innovation and Production on the Internet: An Interdisciplinary Perspective|publisher=Universitätsverlag Göttingen|year=2011|url=https://univerlag.uni-goettingen.de/bitstream/handle/3/isbn-978-3-86395-020-0/wittke_hanekop.pdf|isbn=978-3-86395-020-0}}</ref> Digital platforms have created opportunities for more people to enact and create, as digital platforms open doors for collaborative communication that can occur synchronously, asynchronously, over far distances, and across multiple disciplines and professions.<ref name="Wittke & Hanekop" /><ref name="Olson-2014">{{cite book|last1=Olson|first1=Judith S.|first2=Gary M.|last2= Olson|title=Working Together Apart: Collaboration Over the Internet|publisher=Morgan & Claypool|series= Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics (SLHCI)|year=2014|isbn=9781608450510}} {{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> |
|||
== History == |
|||
* ''[[Crowdsourcing]]'' – Daren Brabham describes the concept of crowdsourcing as the use of modern technology to collaborate, create, and solve problems collectively.<ref name="Brabham-2013">{{cite book |last=Brabham |first=Daren C. |url=https://wtf.tw/ref/brabham.pdf |title=Crowdsourcing |publisher=MIT Press |year=2013 |isbn=9780262518475 |series=Essential Knowledge}}</ref> [[Ethics|Ethical]] concerns have been raised while engaging in crowdsourcing, specifically in situations that lack a clear set of compensation practices or protections in place to secure information.<ref name="Brabham-2013" /> |
|||
[[File:Links2.png|thumb|Image depicting prose with [[Hypertext]] ]] |
|||
* ''Delivery'' – Digital technologies allow rhetoric to be delivered in new "electronic forms of discourse".<ref name=":Welch 1999">{{Cite book|last1=Welch|first1=Kathleen E.|title=Electric Rhetoric: Classical Rhetoric, Oralism, and a New Literacy|last2=Barrett|first2=Edward|date=1999|publisher=MIT Press|isbn=978-0-262-23202-9}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> Acts and modes of communication can be represented digitally by combining multiple different forms of media into a composite helping to create an easy user experience.<ref name="Chapman-2000">{{cite book|last1=Chapman|first1=Nigel|first2=Jenny|last2=Chapman|title=Digital Multimedia|edition=1st|location=New York, NY|publisher=John Wiley & Sons, LTD.|year=2000|isbn=978-0-471-98386-6}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> The growing popularity of the [[Internet meme]] is an example of combining, circulating, and delivering media in a collaborative effort through file sharing. Although memes are sent through microtransactions they often have a macro-level, large-scale impact.<ref name="Shifman 2014">{{Cite book|last=Shifman|first=Limor|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cZI9AQAAQBAJ&q=rhetoric+memes&pg=PP8|title=Memes in Digital Culture|date=2014|publisher=MIT Press|isbn=978-0-262-52543-5|language=en}}</ref> Another form of rhetorical delivery are encyclopedias, which traditionally were printed and based primarily on text and images. However, modern technological developments now enable online encyclopedias to integrate sound, animation, video, algorithmic search functions, and high-level productions into a cohesive multimedia experience as part of their new forms of digital rhetoric.<ref name="Chapman-2000" /> |
|||
=== |
=== Critical literacy === |
||
[[Critical literacy]] is the ability to identify [[bias]] in media, under the assumption that all media is biased.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Giselsson|first=Kristi|date=May 31, 2020|title=Critical Thinking and Critical Literacy: Mutually Exclusive?|journal=International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning|volume=14|issue=1|doi=10.20429/ijsotl.2020.140105|doi-access=free}}</ref> It can also be defined as a communicative tool to lead to social change and promote social action by using a critical lens when approaching social-political topics.<ref>{{Cite journal |first1=Katherine|last1=Norris |first2=Lisa|last2= Lucas |first3=Catherine|last3=Prudhoe |date=2012|title=Preparing Preservice Teachers to Use Critical Literacy in the Early Childhood Classroom|url=https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1001528.pdf|journal=Multicultural Education|volume=19|issue=2|series=Promising Practices|pages=52–62; 62|via=Google Scholar|s2cid=26401103}}</ref> In order to identify bias amid the immense volume of information imposed on digital audiences, individuals need to develop the ability to process and critically examine content—on both familiar and unfamiliar topics.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Critical Literacy in A Digital Era: Technology, Rhetoric, and the Public interest|url=https://www.routledge.com/Critical-Literacy-in-A-Digital-Era-Technology-Rhetoric-and-the-Public/Warnick/p/book/9780805841169|access-date=February 21, 2022|website=Routledge & CRC Press|language=en}}</ref> |
|||
[[Aristotle]] defined [[rhetoric]] as “the art ([[techne]]) of finding out the available means of persuasion”.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> The project of rhetorical study was to identify what made successful, persuasive oration so moving. Classical rhetoric was focused on legal, political and ceremonial speeches, and designated three modes of expression: [[logos]] (logical argument), [[pathos]] (emotional appeals), and [[ethos]] (establishing the authority of the speaker). A speech was divided into 5 parts, which form the canon of classical rhetoric.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> |
|||
In an essay on critical literacy in writing, the [[University of Melbourne]] stated the importance of developing these skills through reading and questioning what texts are trying to accomplish. Ultimately, this allows an idea's interpretation to come from the reader, not the writer.<ref>{{Cite journal |date=2018 |title=Critical Literacy – Developing your critical literacy skills |url=https://students.unimelb.edu.au/academic-skills/resources/study-skills/learning-strategies/critical-literacy |journal=The University of Melbourne}}</ref> |
|||
Just as technology and its availability have changed over time, digital rhetoric has shifted from being only concerned with persuasion to also being concerned with [[Self-expression values|self expression]] and collaboration with the purpose of building communities of people with shared interest.<ref>{{Cite journal |date=2013 |title=Digital Rhetoric |journal=College Composition and Communication |volume=64 |issue=4 |pages=721 |jstor=43490789}}</ref> While the five canons of rhetoric<ref>{{Cite web |date=2008-04-23 |title=Cicero's Classical Canons of Rhetoric: Their Relevance and Importance to the Corporate Workplace |url=https://maryvican.wordpress.com/2008/04/23/cicero%e2%80%99s-classical-canons-of-rhetoric-their-relevance-and-importance-to-the-corporate-workplace/ |access-date=2017-03-27 |website=Mary}}</ref> developed for oratory print still apply, they are reconfigured to work in new contextual forms like the [[database]], the [[hypertext]], the [[cybertext]], and other [[born-digital]] texts that restructure the current rhetorical situation. [[Inventio]]n,<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Delagrange, Susan |year=2009 |title=Wunderkammer, Cornell, and the Visual Canon of Arrangement |url=http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/13.2/topoi/delagrange/index.html |journal=Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy |volume=13 |issue=2}}</ref> [[Dispositio|arrangement]],<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Yancey |first=Kathleen Blake |date=March 2004 |title=Looking for sources of coherence in a fragmented world: Notes toward a new assessment design |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=21 |issue=1 |pages=89–102 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2003.08.024}}</ref> and [[Elocutio|style]]<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Brooke, Collin |year=2002 |title=''Enculturation: Special Multi-journal Issue on Electronic Publication'' |volume=4 |issue=1}}</ref> take on new meanings while [[Pronuntiatio|delivery]]<ref name="Porter" /> is elevated to new importance, and [[Memoria|memory]] comes to refer to textual forms like [[Web search engine|search engines]],<ref>{{Cite book |last=Anne Wysocki |title=Writing New Media: Theory and Applications for Expanding the Teaching of Composition |last2=Johndan Johnson-Eilola |last3=Cynthia L. Selfe |last4=Geoffrey Sirc |publisher=U of Utah Press |year=2003 |location=Salt Lake City |name-list-style=amp}}</ref> archives,<ref>{{Cite book |last=Jeff Rice |title=Digital Detroit: Rhetoric and Space in the Age of the Network |publisher=Southern Illinois University Press |year=2012 |location=Carbondale}}</ref> and tags.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Brooke, Collin Gifford |title=Lingua Fracta: Toward a Rhetoric of New Media |publisher=Hampton |year=2009 |location=Cresskill, NJ}}</ref> Although the rhetorical canon of delivery once referred to the oral/aural and bodily aspects of delivery, in the age of digital rhetoric, it refers to "Internet-based communication" and the media that are used.<ref name="Porter">{{Cite journal |last=Porter |first=James E. |date=December 2009 |title=Recovering Delivery for Digital Rhetoric |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=26 |issue=4 |pages=207–224 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2009.09.004}}</ref> While the study of digital rhetoric is not specific to any one technology or era of technology, ideas in digital rhetoric have evolved alongside new technologies such as [[smartphone]]s, new and easy to use composing platforms like [[Storify]], [[Pixorial]], and [[WeVideo]], and techniques such as [[Ajax (programming)|Ajax]]. One way of studying digital rhetoric is to trace the ways that the affordances and constraints of technology "support and enable the transformation of the old rhetoric of persuasion into a new digital rhetoric that encourages self-expression, participation, and creative collaboration".<ref name="Zappen">{{Cite journal |last=Zappen |first=James P. |date=July 2005 |title=Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory |journal=Technical Communication Quarterly |volume=14 |issue=3 |pages=319–325 |doi=10.1207/s15427625tcq1403_10 |s2cid=54783060}}</ref> More recently, digital rhetoricians have transduced the information through the digital that we regularly interact with and ultimately form our consciousness, knowledge, and habits of mind.<ref name="Boyle 251–259">{{Cite journal |last=Boyle |first=Casey |last2=Brown |first2=James J. |last3=Ceraso |first3=Steph |date=27 May 2018 |title=The Digital: Rhetoric Behind and Beyond the Screen |journal=Rhetoric Society Quarterly |volume=48 |issue=3 |pages=251–259 |doi=10.1080/02773945.2018.1454187 |s2cid=149842629}}</ref> |
|||
For example, a study conducted at the [[Indiana University Bloomington|Indiana University in Bloomington]] used algorithms to assess 14 million Twitter messages containing statements about the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and election. They found that from May 2016 to March 2017, [[social bot]]s were responsible for causing approximately 389,000 unsupported political claims to go viral.<ref>{{cite arXiv|last=Shao|first=Chencheng|display-authors=etal|title=The Spread of Fake News by Social Bots|year=2017|class=cs.SI |eprint=1707.07592v1}} Andy Black Associates.</ref> |
|||
===Shift from print to digital=== |
|||
[[File:Wampum Georgina Ontario.png|alt=wampum belts|thumb|Native American wampum belts]] |
|||
[[Dennis Baron]] states, "The first writing technology was writing itself."<ref>{{Cite web |title=Pencils to Pixels |url=http://faculty.las.illinois.edu/debaron/essays/pencils.htm |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=faculty.las.illinois.edu}}</ref> While previous writing technologies involved [[pencil]]s and [[hieroglyphics]], the [[Evolutionary history of life|evolution]] of communication technology now allows for online and immediate rhetorical conversations, and it also varies by culture.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Baron, D. (n.d.) |title=From Pencils to Pixels: The Stages of Literacy Technology |url=http://www.english.illinois.edu/-people-/faculty/debaron/essays/pencils.htm |access-date=January 1, 2014 |publisher=english.illinois.edu}}</ref> Angela Haas discusses the technology and communicative methods of Native Americans extensively in her work ''—'' denouncing Western discovery claims to [[hypertext]]s and [[multimedia]] as she describes how Native Americans used [[Wampum|wampum belts]] as hypertext technologies.<ref name="Wampum as Hypertext: An American In">{{Cite journal |last=Haas |first=Angela M. |date=2008 |title=Wampum as Hypertext: An American Indian Intellectual Tradition of Multimedia Theory and Practice |journal=Studies in American Indian Literatures |volume=19 |issue=4 |pages=77–100 |doi=10.1353/ail.2008.0005 |s2cid=144801330}}</ref> The origins of modern computing can be found in the techno-military context of [[World War II]].<ref>{{Cite AV media |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ebsoslgfgts |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211219/Ebsoslgfgts |archive-date=2021-12-19 |url-status=live|title=What is Digital Rhetoric? |year=2011 |via=YouTube}}{{cbignore}}</ref> Just as the pencil was originally intended as a marking utensil for builders and is now used for writing, the computer was originally intended to [[Computing|compute]] advanced math problems, but is now used for word-processing and a myriad of other tasks. Technology continues to modify itself to meet the needs of people; in the case of digital rhetoric, technology has become more prevalent to match people's usage of the Internet and computers, which creates a [[technoculture]]. |
|||
=== Interactivity === |
|||
Another scholar who highlights the changing landscape from print to digital is Jay Bolter. He argues that the computer is the most significant development since the start of the [[alphabet]]ic/print tradition and that digital texts will continue to move print to the "margins of literate culture".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Bolter, J. |title=Writing space: The computer, hypertext, and the history of writing |publisher=L. Erlbaum Associates |year=1991 |location=Hillsdale, N.J.}}</ref> However, while computers may be one of the most prominent means of producing digital rhetoric, Sean Morey notes that many other devices, including [[smartphone]]s, tablets, [[digital camera]]s, [[electronic pen]]s, [[graphic design]] programs, presentation [[software]], and more can be utilized for the same purpose.<ref name=":9">{{Cite book |last=Morey |first=Sean |title=The Digital Writer |publisher=Fountainhead Press |year=2017 |isbn=978-1-68036-354-8 |location=Southlake, Texas |pages=37–70}}</ref> Adam Banks delves into the rhetorical nature of the conception of the idea of these technologies, from the physical designs of these interfaces to the sociocultural backgrounds that either promote usage or dissuade people from these artifacts and the skills to produce or work with them, as a central part of digital rhetoric.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Banks |first=Adam |title=Digital Griots : African American Rhetoric in a Multimedia Age |publisher=SIU Press |year=2011 |isbn=978-0-8093-9062-5 |location=USA |page=14}}</ref> Digital rhetoric has moved beyond interactions with computer screens and has seamlessly been integrated into everything we do to the extent that it has become a multi-sensory. It informs knowledge beyond what can be visually seen on a computer screen, using other senses such as the oral and touch.<ref name="Boyle 251–259" /> |
|||
[[Interactivity]] in digital rhetoric can be defined as the ways in which readers connect to and communicate with digital texts. This includes activity between the audience, the audience and the message being sent, the audience and the medium, and the communication between separate mediums. Readers have the ability to like, share, repost, comment on, and remix online content. These interactions allow writers, scholars, and content creators to get a better idea of how their work is affecting their audience.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pius Nedumkallel |first=Jose |date=January 2020 |title=Interactivity of Digital Media: Literature Review and Future Research Agenda |url=http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/IJICST.2020010102 |journal=International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies |language=en |volume=10 |issue=1 |pages=13–30 |doi=10.4018/IJICST.2020010102 |issn=2155-4218}}</ref> |
|||
Some ways communicators promote interactivity include the following: |
|||
Early shifts from print to digital created many social implications, one of the most prominent being the issue of [[copyright]]. This shift made it easier to reproduce and mass distribute various forms of digital media online. Because of this ease of transformation, copyright laws are undermined as scholars lose predication in their online materials through maneuvers as simple as copy and paste or translating hyperlinks. In [https://faculty.rpi.edu/node/34734 James P. Zappen's] piece ''"Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory"'', he refers to transferring material in ways that create misapplication of a work that a scholar has written. "A media database, for example, can produce an almost infinite variety of end-user objects, which can be customized for different users, manipulated through hyperlinks, periodically updated, and scaled upon demand." Zappen's statement of "infinite" is in no way subjective or an over statement. Many digital pieces are infringed upon, stolen, or misused by the avoidance of copyright.<ref name="Zappen" /> Sites like [[LimeWire]] were heavily scrutinized for its contribution to the issue of pirating music.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Koh|first=Byungwan|last2=Murthi|first2=B. P. S.|last3=Raghunathan|first3=Srinivasan|date=2014-10-02|title=Shifting Demand: Online Music Piracy, Physical Music Sales, and Digital Music Sales|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/10919392.2014.956592|journal=Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce|volume=24|issue=4|pages=366–387|doi=10.1080/10919392.2014.956592|issn=1091-9392}}</ref> Though it still persists, today, the issue of copyright has largely shifted alongside the digital world. For example in the music industry, the emergence of streaming sites like Spotify or Apple Music have greatly lessened the frequency of music piracy.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Towse|first=Ruth|date=2020-06-10|title=Dealing with digital: the economic organisation of streamed music|url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0163443720919376|journal=Media, Culture & Society|volume=42|issue=7-8|pages=1461–1478|doi=10.1177/0163443720919376|issn=0163-4437}}</ref> |
|||
* ''[[Mind share|Mind sharing]]'' is the methods and components of communication that collective intelligence is gathered and transferred. It is based in the sharing of emotional, knowledge-based, and goal-based sharing. The human ability of language is the primary example of mind-sharing. Mind sharing functions as a method of concept sharing, presenting generally agreed upon meanings for words and phrases, and concept activation sharing, where these specific meanings prompt reactions when communicated.<ref>{{Citation |last=Zaefferer |first=Dietmar |title=Language as mind sharing device: Mental and linguistic concepts in a general ontology of everyday life |date=2008-08-22 |work=Language as mind sharing device: Mental and |pages=193–230 |url=https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783110197792.2.193/html |access-date=2024-10-19 |publisher=De Gruyter Mouton |language=en |doi=10.1515/9783110197792.2.193 |isbn=978-3-11-019779-2}}</ref> |
|||
===Move to post-digital=== |
|||
* ''[[Multimodality]]'' is a form of communication that uses multiple methods (or modes) to inform audiences of an idea. It can involve a mix of written text, pictures, audio, or videos. These communications offer a wealth of information that could not be accessed from traditional methods, but are disorganized and can be difficult to reach conclusions from. All writing and all communication is, theoretically, multimodal.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last1=Grewal |first1=Dhruv |last2=Herhausen |first2=Dennis |last3=Ludwig |first3=Stephan |last4=Villarroel Ordenes |first4=Francisco |date=2022-06-01 |title=The Future of Digital Communication Research: Considering Dynamics and Multimodality |url=https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0022435921000075 |journal=Journal of Retailing |volume=98 |issue=2 |pages=224–240 |doi=10.1016/j.jretai.2021.01.007 |issn=0022-4359|hdl=11585/981477 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
Paul Daughtery states “a post-digital world doesn’t mean that digital is over<nowiki>''</nowiki> but rather suggests that it can only stem from a place where the digital age has spread and advanced to a point that new questions surrounding [[Digital literacy|digital competency]] and differentiation.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Accenture Tech Vision 2019 – 5 Tech Trends for the Post-Digital era |url=https://www.accenture.com/us-en/insights/technology/technology-trends-2020?src=SOMS |access-date=2021-02-23 |website=www.accenture.com |language=en}}</ref> Spheres of commerce and communication have reached a point of prevalence where the descriptor “digital” is dropped from things such as businesses.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Sentance |first=Rebecca |date=2019-02-08 |title=The week in digital transformation: Are we in a post-digital era? |url=https://econsultancy.com/post-digital-transformation-news-accenture-air-malta/ |access-date=2021-02-23 |website=Econsultancy |language=en}}</ref> Justin Hodgson discusses that the quotidian experience and presence of the digital world and digital technologies has birthed post-digital rhetoric.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Hodgson |first=Justin |title=Post-Digital Rhetoric And The New Aesthetic |publisher=Ohio State University Press |year=2019 |isbn=978-0-8142-1394-0 |location=US}}</ref> In this post-digital rhetorical landscape, the issue of who technology is designed for is troubled further with algorithms meant to tailor the experience and content to the individual. Gerard Goggin and Christopher Newell bring up the point that, while the digital world offers people with [[Disability|disabilities]] the possibility to “pass” as able-bodied in communication, there remain problems of website [[Computer accessibility|accessibility]] and functionality of platforms like email that create [[Social exclusion|marginalization]] and friction in practice.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Goggin |first=Gerard |title=Digital Disability : The Social Construction of Disability in New Media. |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-7425-1843-8 |location=Australia}}</ref> |
|||
* ''[[Remix culture|Remix]]'' is a method of digital rhetoric that manipulates and transforms an original work to convey a new message. The use of remix can help the creator make an argument by connecting seemingly unrelated ideas into a convincing whole. As modern technology develops, self-publication sites such as [[YouTube]], [[SoundCloud]], and [[WordPress]] have stimulated remix culture, allowing for easier creation and dissemination of reworked content. Unlike appropriation, which is the use and potential recontextualization of existing material without significant modification, 'remix' is defined by Ridolfo and Devoss as "the process of taking old pieces of text, images, sounds, and video and stitching them together to form a new product".<ref>{{Cite web |last=DeVoss |first=Jim Ridolfo and Dànielle Nicole |date=2009-01-15 |title=Composing for Recomposition: Rhetorical Velocity and Delivery |url=https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/13.2/topoi/ridolfo_devoss/remix.html |access-date=2024-10-19 |website=13.2 |language=English}}</ref> A popular example of remixing is the creation and sharing of [[Meme|memes]]. <ref name=":6">{{Cite journal |last=Marwick |first=Alice |date=November 2013 |title=Memes |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1536504213511210 |journal=Contexts |language=en |volume=12 |issue=4 |pages=12–13 |doi=10.1177/1536504213511210 |issn=1536-5042}}</ref> |
|||
=== Procedural rhetoric === |
|||
Building off the technology and the growth of the digital population, post-digital rhetoric understands the boundaries of digital and that which is labelled non-digital to be connected. Print texts and oral performances are digitalized. Likewise, digital artifacts are printed or made present outside their sphere. |
|||
[[Procedural rhetoric]] is rhetoric formed through processes or practices.<ref name="Bogost-2008">{{Cite book |last=Bogost |first=Ian |title=The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning |publisher=The MIT Press |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-262-69364-6 |location=Cambridge, MA |chapter=The Rhetoric of Video Games}}</ref> Some scholars view [[video game]]s as one of these processes through which rhetoric can be formed.<ref name="Bogost-2008" /><ref name="Gonzalo-2003">{{Cite book |last=Gonzalo |first=Frasca |title=The Video Game Theory Reader |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-415-96579-8 |editor-last=Wolf |editor-first=Mark J.P. |publisher=Routledge|location =New York |chapter=Simulation versus Narrative: Introduction to Ludology |editor2-last=Perron |editor2-first=Bernard}}</ref> For example, [[ludology]] scholar and game designer [[Gonzalo Frasca]] poses that the simulation-nature of computers and video games offers a "natural medium for modeling reality and fiction".<ref name="Gonzalo-2003" /> Therefore, according to Frasca, video games can take on a new form of digital rhetoric in which reality is mimicked but also created for the future.<ref name="Gonzalo-2003" /> Similarly, scholar Ian Bogost argues that video games can serve as models for how 'real-world' cultural and social systems operate.<ref name="Bogost-2008" /> They also argue for the necessity of literacy in playing video games as this allows players to challenge (and ultimately accept or reject) the rhetorical standpoints of these games.<ref name="Bogost-2008" /> |
|||
===Rhetorical velocity=== |
===Rhetorical velocity=== |
||
[[Rhetorical velocity]] is the concept of authors writing in a way in which they are able to predict how their work might be recomposed. |
[[Rhetorical velocity]] is the concept of authors writing in a way in which they are able to predict how their work might be recomposed. Scholars Jim Ridolfo and Danielle DeVoss first coined this idea in 2009 when they described rhetorical velocity as "a conscious rhetorical concern for distance, travel, speed, and time, pertaining specifically to theorizing instances of strategic [[Appropriation of knowledge|appropriation]] by a third party".<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Ridolfo, J.|last2=Devoss, D.|name-list-style=amp|year=2009|title=Composing for Recomposition: Rhetorical Velocity and Delivery|url=http://kairos.technorhetoric.net/13.2/topoi/ridolfo_devoss/intro.html|journal=Kairos|volume=13|issue=2}}</ref> Author Sean Morey agrees with this definition of rhetorical velocity and describes it as a creator anticipating the response their work with generate.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Morey |first=Sean |title=The digital writer |date=2017 |isbn=978-1-68036-354-8 |location=Southlake, TX |publisher=Fountainhead Press|oclc=1018379426}}</ref> |
||
For example, digital rhetoric is often labelled using [[Tag (metadata)|tags]], which are keywords used to help readers find, view, and share relevant texts and information. These tags can be found on [[blog]] posts, news articles, [[Academic journal|scholarly journals]], and more. Tagging allows writers, scholars, and content creators to organize their work and make it more accessible and understandable to readers.<ref name="Morey-2017">{{Cite book |last=Morey |first=Sean |title=The Digital Writer |publisher=Fountainhead Press |year=2017 |isbn=978-1-68036-354-8 |location=Southlake, Texas |pages=37–70}}</ref> |
|||
Appropriation carries both positive and negative [[connotation]]s for rhetorical velocity. In some ways appropriation is a tool that can be used for the reapplication of outdated ideas to make them better. In other ways appropriation is seen as a threat to creative and cultural identities. [[Social media]] receives the bulk of this scrutiny due to the lack of [[education]] of its users. Most "contributors are often unaware of what they are contributing",<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Reyman, J. |year=2013 |title=User Data on the Social Web: Authorship, Agency, and Appropriation |url=http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/Journals/CE/0755-may2013/CE0755User.pdf |journal=College English |volume=75 |issue=5 |pages=513–532 |access-date=November 1, 2014 |via=ncte.org}}</ref> which perpetuates the negative connotation. Many scholars in digital rhetoric explore this topic and its effects on society such as Jessica Reyman, Amy Hea, and Johndan Johnson-Eilola. |
|||
Appropriation carries both positive and negative [[connotation]]s for rhetorical velocity. In some ways, appropriation is a tool that can be used for the reapplication of outdated ideas to make them better. In other ways, appropriation is seen as a threat to creative and cultural identities. [[Social media]] receives the bulk of this scrutiny due to the lack of education of its users. Most "contributors are often unaware of what they are contributing",<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Reyman, J.|year=2013|title=User Data on the Social Web: Authorship, Agency, and Appropriation|url=http://www.ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/Journals/CE/0755-may2013/CE0755User.pdf|journal=College English|volume=75|issue=5|pages=513–532|doi=10.58680/ce201323565 |access-date=November 1, 2014|via=ncte.org}}</ref> which perpetuates the negative connotation. Scholars in digital rhetoric—such as Jessica Reyman, Amy Hea, and Johndan Johnson-Eilola—explore this topic and its effects on society. Scholars have also connected the role of rhetorical velocity to visual rhetoric through a study of environmental image circulation, demonstrating that "while environmental image circulation is often viewed as an ambivalent, or even performative, practice for environmental citizenship, it is also an important space for cultivating participatory culture online."<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Jones |first1=Madison |last2=Beveridge |first2=Aaron |last3=Garrison |first3=Julian R. |last4=Greene |first4=Abbey |last5=MacDonald |first5=Hannah |date=2022 |title=Tracking Memes in the Wild: Visual Rhetoric and Image Circulation in Environmental Communication |journal=Frontiers in Communication |volume=7 |doi=10.3389/fcomm.2022.883278 |issn=2297-900X |doi-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
== Critical Approaches == |
|||
=== |
=== Visual rhetoric === |
||
[[File:Example of modern internet meme.jpg|left|thumb|214x214px|First, an "initial" meme is created to illustrate some joke or idea.]] |
|||
[[Procedural rhetoric]] is [[rhetoric]] formed through processes or practices.<ref name=":23">{{Cite book |last=Bogost |first=Ian |title=The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning. |publisher=The MIT Press |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-262-69364-6 |location=Cambridge, MA |chapter=The Rhetoric of Video Games}}</ref> Some scholars view [[video game]]s as one of these processes through which rhetoric can be formed.<ref name=":23" /><ref name=":24">{{Cite book |last=Gonzalo |first=Frasca |title=The Video Game Theory Reader |year=2003 |isbn=978-0-415-96579-8 |editor-last=Wolf |editor-first=Mark J.P. |location=Routledge, New York |chapter=Simulation versus Narrative: Introduction to Ludology |editor-last2=Perron |editor-first2=Bernard}}</ref> For example, [[Ludology]] scholar and game designer [[Gonzalo Frasca]] poses that the simulation-nature of computers and video games offers a "natural medium for modeling reality and fiction".<ref name=":24" /> Therefore, according to Frasca, video games can take on a new form of digital rhetoric in which reality is mimicked but also created for the future.<ref name=":24" /> Similarly, scholar Ian Bogost argues that video games can serve as models for how 'real-world' cultural and social systems operate.<ref name=":23" /> They also argue for the necessity of literacy in playing video games as this allows players to challenge (and ultimately accept or reject) the rhetorical standpoints of these games.<ref name=":23" /> |
|||
[[File:Emoji u270a.svg|thumb|156x156px|The "default" skin tone for emojis is yellow.]] |
|||
Digital rhetoric often invokes [[visual rhetoric]] due to digital rhetoric's reliance on visuals.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> Charles Hill states that images "do not necessarily have to portray an object, or even a class of objects, that exists or ever did exist" to remain impactful.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Handa, C.|title=Visual rhetoric in a digital world: A critical sourcebook|publisher=Bedford/St. Martins|year=2004|location=Boston|chapter=Reading the Visual in College Writing Classes By Charles Hill}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> However, the use of imagery for rhetorical purposes in digital spaces cannot always be easily differentiated from "traditional" physical visual mediums. As such, approaching this concept requires a careful analysis of the viewer, situational, and visual contexts involved.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hocks|first=Mary E.|date=2003|title=Understanding Visual Rhetoric in Digital Writing Environments|journal=College Composition and Communication|volume=54|issue=4|pages=629–656|doi=10.2307/3594188|jstor=3594188|s2cid=142341944}}</ref> A prominent part of this concept is its intersection of perspective with technology, as computers allow users to create a curated view for online space. Examples of the Internet relying and reshaping visual rhetoric include [[Social media]] platforms like [[Instagram]],<ref>{{Cite book |title=Female Agency and Documentary Strategies: Subjectivities, Identity and Activism |publisher=Edinburgh University Press |year=2018 |isbn=9781474444699 |editor-last=Ulfsdotter |editor-first=Boel |location=Edinburgh |editor2-last=Rogers |editor2-first=Anna B.}}</ref> and incredibly realistic [[Deepfake|deepfakes]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Citron |first1=Danielle |last2=Chesney |first2=Robert |date=January 1, 2019 |title=Deepfakes and the New Disinformation War |url=https://scholarship.law.bu.edu/shorter_works/76 |journal=Foreign Affairs}}</ref>[[File:Deepfryed internet meme.png|left|thumb|214x214px|Then, another user modifies the original to illustrate their own idea; in this image, a "deep fried" effect is added to distort the image.]] |
|||
Digitally-produced art is a significant way users express themselves on technological platforms; the unique intersection of text and image has given rise to new rhetorical language through the modification of slang and in-group language.<ref>{{Citation|last=Szablewicz|first=Marcella|title="Losers" "Acting Gay": Internet Slang, Memes, and Affective Intensities|date=2020|work=Mapping Digital Game Culture in China: From Internet Addicts to Esports Athletes|pages=135–165|editor-last=Szablewicz|editor-first=Marcella|series=East Asian Popular Culture|place=Cham|publisher=Springer International Publishing|language=en|doi=10.1007/978-3-030-36111-2_6|isbn=978-3-030-36111-2|s2cid=213137393}}</ref> In particular, the culturally-specific and nuanced use of pop culture references through [[Internet meme]]s have gradually built upon themselves to create complex, highly flexible, and Internet-specific (or even platform-specific) dialects of speech.<ref>{{Cite web|date=June 30, 2018|title=The Language of Memes: A Brief Explanation|url=https://whatever.scalzi.com/2018/06/30/the-language-of-memes-a-brief-explanation/|access-date=February 17, 2022|website=Whatever|language=en-US}}</ref> <ref name=":6" />Through popularity-based [[natural selection]], edits of commonly accepted meme templates fuel the cycle of rhetorical creation.<ref name=":6" /> |
|||
Other forms of digital-visual rhetoric include [[remix]]ing and [[parody]]ing. In the chapter "Digital Rhetoric Practice" in ''Digital Rhetoric Theory, Method, Practice'', Douglas Eyman speaks about the growth of digital rhetoric in a digital world. Digital rhetoric has become distinguished from its other rhetoric counterparts, as it is an easily accessible path for people to spread their messages through the reuse of already existing content and putting their own twist on it.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> This is widespread because of meme cultures and online video platforms.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Marwick |first=Alice |date=November 2013 |title=Memes |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1536504213511210 |journal=Contexts |language=en |volume=12 |issue=4 |pages=12–13 |doi=10.1177/1536504213511210 |issn=1536-5042}}</ref> |
|||
Digital-visual rhetoric does not only rely on intentional manipulation. Sometimes, meanings can arise from unexpected places and otherwise-overlooked features. For example, [[emoji]]s can carry heavy consequences by permeating daily communication. Varying skin tones provided (or excluded) by developers for emojis may perpetuate preexisting racial biases of [[colorism]].<ref name="Matamoros Fernandez-2018">{{Cite journal|last=Matamoros Fernandez|first=Ariadna|date=2018|title=Inciting anger through Facebook reactions in Belgium: The use of emoji and related vernacular expressions in racist discourse|url=https://eprints.qut.edu.au/122413/|journal=First Monday|language=en|volume=23|issue=9|pages=Article number: 94051–20|issn=1396-0466}}</ref> Even otherwise-innocuous images of peaches and eggplants are regular stand-ins for genital regions; they can be both harmless modes of flirtation and tools for [[Sexual harassment|sexually harassing]] women online when sent en masse.<ref name="Matamoros Fernandez-2018" /> |
|||
The concept of the [[Avatar (computing)|avatar]] also illustrates visual rhetoric's deeply personal impact, particularly when using [[Miami University]] scholar James E. Porter's definition of the avatar as an extended "virtual body".<ref name="Porter">{{Cite journal|last=Porter|first=James E.|date=December 2009|title=Recovering Delivery for Digital Rhetoric|journal=Computers and Composition|volume=26|issue=4|pages=207–224|doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2009.09.004}}</ref> While scholars such as [[Beth Kolko]] hoped for an equitable online world free of physical barriers, [[social issue]]s still persist in digital realms, such as [[gender discrimination]] and [[racism]].<ref name="Kolko">{{Cite journal|last=Kolko|first=Beth E.|date=August 1999|title=Representing Bodies in Virtual Space: The Rhetoric of Avatar Design|journal=The Information Society|volume=15|issue=3|pages=177–186|doi=10.1080/019722499128484}}</ref> For example, Victoria Woolums found that, in the video game [[World of Warcraft]], an avatar's gender identity instigated bias from other characters even though an avatar's [[gender identity]] may not be physically accurate to its user.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Woolums|first=Viola|date=Fall 2011|title=Gendered Avatar Identity|url=https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/16.1/topoi/woolums/|journal=Kairos|volume=16|issue=1}}</ref> These relationships are further complicated by the varying degrees of anonymity characterizing inter-user communications in online spaces. While the possibility of true privacy can be facilitated by impersonal avatars, they are still personal manifestations of a user's self in the context of digital spaces.<ref name="Cross-2022">{{Cite web |last=Cross |first=Katherine |title=The Queer Avatar of Failure {{!}} By: Katherine Cross {{!}} Making & Breaking |url=https://makingandbreaking.org/article/the-queer-avatar-of-failure/ |access-date=March 2, 2022 |website=Making and Breaking |language=en-US}}</ref> Furthermore, the tools available to curate and express these are platform-dependent and ripe for both liberation and exploitation. In circumstances such as [[Gamergate (harassment campaign)|Gamergate]] or debates regarding [[influencer]] culture and their portrayals of impossible and computer-edited [[body image]], self-presentation is heavily mediated by accessibility to and mastery of online avatars.<ref name="Cross-2022" /> |
|||
==Forms and objects of study== |
|||
=== Infrastructure === |
|||
Information infrastructure is the underlying organization of public information on the Internet, which impacts how and what the public accesses online.<ref name="Johnson">{{Cite journal |last=Johnson |first=Nathan R. |date=April 2, 2012 |title=Information Infrastructure as Rhetoric: Tools for Analysis |url=https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/poroi/article/id/3377/ |journal=Poroi |language=en |volume=8 |issue=1 |pages=1–3 |doi=10.13008/2151-2957.1113 |issn=2151-2957|doi-access=free }}</ref> Databases and search engines are information infrastructure as they play a large role in access to and dissemination of information. Information Infrastructure often consists of algorithms and metadata standards, which curate the information presented to the public.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Johnson|first=Nathan R.|date=April 2, 2012|title=Information Infrastructure as Rhetoric: Tools for Analysis|url=http://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/poroi/article/id/3377/|journal=Poroi|language=en|volume=8|issue=1|pages=1–3|doi=10.13008/2151-2957.1113|issn=2151-2957|doi-access=free}}</ref> |
|||
==== Software ==== |
|||
[[Computer programming|Coding]] and [[software engineering]] are not often recognized as rhetorical writing practices, but in the process of writing [[code]], people instruct machines to "make arguments and judgments and address audiences both mechanic and human".<ref name="Vee-2016">{{Cite journal|last1=Vee|first1=Annette|last2=Brown|first2=Jr|date=January 15, 2016|title=Rhetoric Special Issue Editorial Introduction|url=http://computationalculture.net/rhetoric-special-issue-editorial-introduction/|journal=Computational Culture|language=en-GB|issue=5|issn=2047-2390}}</ref> Technologies themselves can be viewed as rhetorical [[genre]]s, simultaneously guiding users' experiences and communication with each other and being shaped and improved through humans use.<ref name="Lewis-2016">{{Cite journal |last=Lewis |first=Justin |date=2016 |title=Content Management Systems, Bittorrent Trackers, and Large-Scale Rhetorical Genres |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282965478 |journal=Journal of Technical Writing and Communication |volume=46 |issue=1 |pages=4–26|doi=10.1177/0047281615600634 |s2cid=148056468 }}</ref> Choices baked into software that are invisible to users impact the user experience and reveal information about the priorities of the software engineers.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Balsamo|first=Anne Marie|title=Designing culture: the technological imagination at work|date=2011|isbn=978-0-8223-4433-9|location=Durham [NC]|publisher=Duke University Press|oclc=682893337}}</ref> For instance, while [[Facebook]] allows users to choose over 50 gender identities to display on their public profile, an investigation into the social media's software revealed that users are filtered into the male-female gender binary within the database for targeted advertising purposes.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bivens|first=Rena|date=June 2017|title=The gender binary will not be deprogrammed: Ten years of coding gender on Facebook|url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444815621527|journal=New Media & Society|language=en|volume=19|issue=6|pages=880–898|doi=10.1177/1461444815621527|s2cid=36100953|issn=1461-4448}}</ref> For another example, pieces of software called [[BitTorrent tracker]]s facilitate the massive distribution of information on Wikipedia. Software facilitates the collective rhetorical action of this encyclopedia.<ref name="Lewis-2016" /> |
|||
The field of [[software studies]] encourages the investigation into and recognition of software's impacts on people and culture.<ref name="Vee-2016" /> |
|||
=== People === |
|||
==== Online communities ==== |
|||
[[Online communities]] are groups of people with common interests that interact and engage over the Internet. Many online communities are found within social networking sites, online forums, and chat rooms, such as [[Facebook]], [[Twitter]], [[Reddit]], and [[4chan]], where members can share and discuss information and inquiries. These online spaces often establish their own rules, norms, and culture, and in some cases, users will adopt community-specific terminology or phrases.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Plant |first=Robert |date=January 2004 |title=Online communities |journal=Technology in Society |volume=26 |issue=1 |pages=51–65 |doi=10.1016/j.techsoc.2003.10.005}}</ref> |
|||
Scholars have noted that online communities have especially gained prominence among users like e-patients and victim-survivors of [[abuse]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Arduser |first=Lora |date=January 2011 |title=Warp and Weft: Weaving the Discussion Threads of an Online Community |journal=Journal of Technical Writing and Communication |volume=41 |issue=1 |pages=5–31 |doi=10.2190/TW.41.1.b |s2cid=144656923}}</ref> Within online health and support groups respectively, members have been able to find others who share similar experiences, receive advice and emotional support, and record their own narrative.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=O'Neill |first=Tully |date=March 1, 2018 |title='Today I Speak': Exploring How Victim-Survivors Use Reddit |journal=International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy |volume=7 |issue=1 |pages=44–59 |doi=10.5204/ijcjsd.v7i1.402 |doi-access=free}}</ref> |
|||
Online communities support community but in some cases can support polarization. Communities face issues with online harassment in the form of [[Internet troll|trolling]], [[cyberbullying]], and [[hate speech]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Nadim |first1=Marjan |last2=Fladmoe |first2=Audun |date=July 30, 2019 |title=Silencing Women? Gender and Online Harassment |journal=Social Science Computer Review |volume=39 |issue=2 |pages=245–258 |doi=10.1177/0894439319865518 |issn=0894-4393 |s2cid=201127019 |doi-access=free |hdl-access=free |hdl=11250/2608353}}</ref> According to the Pew Research Center, 41% of Americans have experienced some form of online harassment with 75% of these experiences occurring over social media.<ref>{{Cite web |date=January 13, 2021 |title=The State of Online Harassment |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/01/13/the-state-of-online-harassment/ |access-date=March 2, 2021 |website=Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech |language=en-US}}</ref> Another area of concern is the influence of algorithms on delineating the online communities a user comes in contact with. Personalizing algorithms can tailor a user's experience to their analytically determined preference, which creates a "[[filter bubble]]". The user loses agency in content accessibility and information dissemination when these bubbles are created.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gallagher |first=John R. |date=September 2017 |title=Writing for Algorithmic Audiences |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=45 |pages=25–35 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2017.06.002}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Adams |first1=Heather Brook |last2=Applegarth |first2=Risa |last3=Simpson |first3=Amber Hester |date=September 2020 |title=Acting with Algorithms: Feminist Propositions for Rhetorical Agency |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=57 |page=102581 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2020.102581 |s2cid=225324822}}</ref> The loss of agency can lead to polarization, but recent research indicates that individual level polarization is rare.<ref name="Waller-20212">{{Cite journal |last1=Waller |first1=Isaac |last2=Anderson |first2=Ashton |date=2021 |title=Quantifying social organization and political polarization in online platforms |url=https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-021-04167-x |journal=Nature |language=en |volume=600 |issue=7888 |pages=264–268 |arxiv=2010.00590 |bibcode=2021Natur.600..264W |doi=10.1038/s41586-021-04167-x |issn=1476-4687 |pmid=34853472 |s2cid=236469369}}</ref> Most polarization is due to the influx of users with extreme views that can encourage users to move towards partisan fringes from "gateway communities".<ref name="Waller-20212" />[[File:Instagram Filters 2011.jpg|thumb|473x473px|A demonstration of subtle [[Instagram]] filters and how radically they can change image perception]] |
|||
==== Social media ==== |
|||
Social media makes human connection formal, manageable, and profitable to social media companies.<ref name="Dijck-2013">{{Cite book|last=Dijck|first=José van|title=The culture of connectivity: a critical history of social media|date=2013|publisher=Oxford University Press|isbn=978-0-19-997079-7|location=Oxford|oclc=839305263}}</ref> The technology that promotes this human connection is not human, but automated. As people use social media and form their experiences on the platforms to meet their interests, the technology also affects how the users interact with each other and the world.<ref name="Dijck-2013" /> |
|||
Social media also allows for the weaving of "offline and online communities into integrated movements".<ref name="Olson 772–787">{{Cite journal|last=Carter Olson|first=Candi|date=September 2, 2016|title=#BringBackOurGirls: digital communities supporting real-world change and influencing mainstream media agendas|journal=Feminist Media Studies|volume=16|issue=5|pages=772–787|doi=10.1080/14680777.2016.1154887|s2cid=216643349}}</ref> Users' actions, such as liking, commenting, sending, retweeting, or saving a post, contribute to the algorithmic customization of their personalized content.<ref name="Swart 205630512110088">{{Cite journal|last=Swart|first=Joëlle|date=April 2021|title=Experiencing Algorithms: How Young People Understand, Feel About, and Engage With Algorithmic News Selection on Social Media|journal=Social Media + Society|volume=7|issue=2|pages=205630512110088|doi=10.1177/20563051211008828|s2cid=234860990|issn=2056-3051|doi-access=free}}</ref> Social media's reach is determined by these algorithms.<ref name="Swart 205630512110088" /> Social media also offers various image altering tools that can impact image perception—making the platform less human and more automated.<ref>{{Cite book|last=McNely|first=Brian J.|title=2012 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference |chapter=Shaping organizational image-power through images: Case histories of Instagram |date=October 2012|chapter-url=https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6408624|pages=1–8|doi=10.1109/IPCC.2012.6408624|isbn=978-1-4577-2126-7|s2cid=1526078}}</ref> |
|||
===== Digital activism ===== |
|||
Digital activism serves an agenda-setting function as it can influence mainstream media and news outlets. [[Hashtag]]s, which curate posts with similar themes and ideas into a central location on a digital platform, aid in bringing exposure to social and political issues. The subsequent discussions these hashtags create put pressure on private institutions and governments to address these issues, as can be seen with movements like #CripTheVote,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Mann|first=Benjamin W|date=December 1, 2018|title=Rhetoric of Online Disability Activism: #CripTheVote and Civic Participation|journal=Communication, Culture and Critique|volume=11|issue=4|pages=604–621|doi=10.1093/ccc/tcy030}}</ref> [[Chibok schoolgirls kidnapping|#BringBackOurGirls]],<ref name="Olson 772–787" /> or [[Me Too movement|#MeToo]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Rodino-Colocino |first=Michelle |date=2018-01-02 |title=Me too, #MeToo: countering cruelty with empathy |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/14791420.2018.1435083 |journal=Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies |language=en |volume=15 |issue=1 |pages=96–100 |doi=10.1080/14791420.2018.1435083 |issn=1479-1420}}</ref> Many recent social movements have originated on [[Twitter]], as Twitter Topic Networks provide a framework for online community organizing. Digital activism allows people who may have not had a voice previously an equal chance to be heard.<ref name="Olson 772–787" /> |
|||
Though some believe that digital activism has a universal function, it takes different forms and philosophies in different parts of the world. In some parts of the world, it takes on a "techno-political" approach, basing communications off of broad political, social, and economic trends, relying on technology prevalent in the [[Free-culture movement|free culture movement]]. Others take a "techno-pragmatic" philosophy, focused more on the specific political and social goal, often at a more personal level. Some areas remain "techno-fragmented," where there are few intersections between traditional and digital forms of activism. <ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Kaun |first1=Anne |last2=Uldam |first2=Julie |date=June 2018 |title=Digital activism: After the hype |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444817731924 |journal=New Media & Society |language=en |volume=20 |issue=6 |pages=2099–2106 |doi=10.1177/1461444817731924 |issn=1461-4448}}</ref> |
|||
===== Influencers and content creators ===== |
|||
As social media is increasingly becoming more available, the [[influencer]]/[[Content creation|content creator]] position has also become recognized as a profession. With such a large and rapid consumer presence on social media, it creates both a helpful and overwhelming source of consumer information for advertisers. There is substantial potential to identify "market mavens" on social media due to [[fandom]] culture and the nature of influencer/content creator followings. Social media has opened up business opportunities for corporations to employ [[influencer marketing]], where they can more easily find suitable influencers to advertise their products to their viewers.<ref name="Harrigan-2021">{{Cite journal |last1=Harrigan |first1=Paul |last2=Daly |first2=Timothy M. |last3=Coussement |first3=Kristof |last4=Lee |first4=Julie A. |last5=Soutar |first5=Geoffrey N. |last6=Evers |first6=Uwana |date=February 1, 2021 |title=Identifying influencers on social media |url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268401220314456 |journal=International Journal of Information Management |language=en |volume=56 |pages=102246 |doi=10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102246 |issn=0268-4012 |s2cid=225115867}}</ref> |
|||
==== Online learning ==== |
|||
Although online learning existed previously, its prevalence increased during the [[COVID-19 pandemic]].<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Zalat|first1=Marwa Mohamed|last2=Hamed|first2=Mona Sami|last3=Bolbol|first3=Sarah Abdelhalim|date=March 26, 2021|title=The experiences, challenges, and acceptance of e-learning as a tool for teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic among university medical staff|journal=PLOS ONE|language=en|volume=16|issue=3|pages=e0248758|doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0248758|issn=1932-6203|pmc=7997029|pmid=33770079|bibcode=2021PLoSO..1648758Z|doi-access=free}}</ref> Online learning platforms are known as e-learning management systems (ELMS). They allow both students and teachers access to a shared, digital space which includes classroom resources, assignments, discussions, and social networking through direct messaging and email.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Rappanta|first1=C.|date=2020|title=Online University Teaching During and After the Covid-19 Crisis: Refocusing Teacher Presence and Learning Activity.|journal=Postdigit Sci Educ|volume=2|issue=3|pages=923–945|doi=10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y|s2cid=220381810|doi-access=free}}</ref> Although socialization is a component of ELMS, not all students utilize these resources; rather, they focus on the lecturer as the primary resource of knowledge.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rapanta |first1=Chrysi |last2=Botturi |first2=Luca |last3=Goodyear |first3=Peter |last4=Guàrdia |first4=Lourdes |last5=Koole |first5=Marguerite |date=2020-10-01 |title=Online University Teaching During and After the Covid-19 Crisis: Refocusing Teacher Presence and Learning Activity |journal=Postdigital Science and Education |language=en |volume=2 |issue=3 |pages=923–945 |doi=10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y |issn=2524-4868 |pmc=7339092}}</ref> The long-term effects of emergency online learning, which many turned to during the height of the pandemic, is ongoing; however, one study concluded that students' "motivation, self-efficacy, and cognitive engagement decreased after the transition".<ref name=":5">{{Cite journal |last=Patricia Aguilera-Hermida |first=A. |date=January 1, 2020 |title=College students' use and acceptance of emergency online learning due to COVID-19 |journal=International Journal of Educational Research Open |language=en |volume=1 |pages=100011 |doi=10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100011 |issn=2666-3740 |pmc=7480788 |pmid=35059662}}</ref> |
|||
=== Interactive media === |
|||
==== Video games ==== |
|||
The procedural and interactive nature of [[video game]]s leads them to be rich examples of [[procedural rhetoric]].<ref name="currents.dwrl.utexas.edu-2021">{{Cite web |title=Procedural Rhetorics – Rhetoric's Procedures: Rhetorical Peaks and What It Means to Win the Game {{!}} Currents in Electronic Literacy |url=https://currents.dwrl.utexas.edu/2010/king_procedural_rhetorics_rhetorics_procedures.html |access-date=February 24, 2021 |website=currents.dwrl.utexas.edu}}</ref> This rhetoric can range from games designed to bolster children's learning to challenging one's assumptions of their world.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Frossard |first1=Frédérique |title=Video Games and Creativity |last2=Trifonova |first2=Anna |last3=Barajas |first3=Mario |year=2015 |isbn=978-0-12-801462-2 |pages=159–183 |chapter=Teachers Designing Learning Games |doi=10.1016/b978-0-12-801462-2.00008-4}}</ref> An educational video game developed for students at the [[University of Texas at Austin]], titled ''Rhetorical Peaks'', was made with the goal of examining rhetoric's procedural nature and to capture the constantly changing contexts of rhetoric.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|title=Rhetorical Peaks: A Design for Teaching Rhetoric in a Gaming Environment {{!}} Welcome to the DWRL|url=https://www.dwrl.utexas.edu/old/content/rhetorical-peaks-design.html|access-date=March 3, 2021|website=www.dwrl.utexas.edu}}</ref><ref name="currents.dwrl.utexas.edu-2021" /> The [[Nonlinear gameplay|open-ended]] nature of the game, as well as the developer's intent on playing the game within a classroom setting, encouraged collaboration among students and the development of individual interpretations of the game's plot based on vague clues; this ultimately helped them to realize that there must be a willingness to change between lines of thought and to work both within and beyond accepted limits in understanding rhetoric.{{Clarify|date=March 2023|reason=1. Unclear subject. In "...helped them to realize...", does "them" refer to the students or developers? |
|||
2. Confusing takeaway. The message about a "willingness to change" is hard to parse and not understandable. What is this trying to say?}}<ref name="currents.dwrl.utexas.edu-2021" /> |
|||
[[File:Xbox 2019 Green horizontal.svg|thumb|The [[Xbox network]], an example of virtual communication between real life and online friends that is embedded in the gaming console]] |
|||
In mainstream gaming, each game has its own set of language which help shape the way information is transferred between players in their community.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://blog.activision.com/|title=COD 101: Definitions of Common Call of Duty®: Modern Warfare® Terms|website=blog.activision.com}}</ref><ref name=":0" /> Within the realm of [[Online game|online gaming]]—which includes games such as ''[[Call of Duty]]'' or ''[[League of Legends]]''—players can communicate with each other and create their own rhetoric within the established world of the game, which allows players to influence and be influenced by the other gamers around them.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Vorderer |first1=Peter |title=Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses, and Consequences. |last2=Bryant |first2=Jennings |date=2012 |publisher=Taylor and Francis |isbn=978-0-203-87370-0 |oclc=847370576}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> |
|||
The game ''[[Detroit: Become Human]]'' has another way of encouraging digital rhetoric within the gaming community. This decision-based video game gives the player the power to create their own story that deals with gender, race, and sexuality. Its futuristic message of a human-to-machine relationship prompts discussion due to the difficult moral decisions made while playing. At the end, there are surveys to take to see other players' opinions about certain decisions around the world.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Leach|first1=Rebecca|last2=Dehnert|first2=Marco|date=January 2, 2021|title=Becoming the other: examining race, gender, and sexuality in Detroit: Become Human|journal=Review of Communication|volume=21|issue=1|pages=23–32|doi=10.1080/15358593.2021.1892173|s2cid=233402236}}</ref> |
|||
==== Podcasting ==== |
|||
Podcasting is another form of digital rhetoric. Podcasting can augment the ancient [[progymnasmata]] in ways that illuminate the relationship between rhetoric and digital sound.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Detweiler |first=Eric |date=April 3, 2019 |title=Sounding Out the Progymnasmata |url=https://doi.org/10.1080/07350198.2019.1588567 |journal=Rhetoric Review |volume=38 |issue=2 |pages=205–218 |doi=10.1080/07350198.2019.1588567 |s2cid=151021917 |issn=0735-0198}}</ref> Podcasting can teach rhetorical practices through soundwriting.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Soundwriting Pedagogies / CCDP |url=https://ccdigitalpress.org/soundwriting |access-date=April 23, 2023 |website=ccdigitalpress.org}}</ref> And a rhetorical pedagogy oriented around narrative nonfiction podcasting may—if it can overcome some key limitations—hold the potential to spark social change.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Choong & Bjork |date=2023 |title=The Student-Podcaster as Narrator of Social Change? |url=https://library.ncte.org/journals/CCC/issues/v74-3/32366 |access-date=April 23, 2023 |website=library.ncte.org}}</ref> |
|||
==== Mobile applications ==== |
|||
[[Mobile app]]lications (apps) are computer programs designed specifically for mobile devices, such as phones or tablets. Mobile apps cater to a wide range of audiences and needs, and allow for a "cultural hybridity of habit" which allows anyone to stay connected with anyone, anywhere.<ref name="Verhulsdonck-2014">{{Cite book|last=Verhulsdonck|first=Gustav|title=Digital Rhetoric and Global Literacies|year=2014|isbn=978-1-4666-4916-3|series=Advances in Linguistics and Communication Studies|pages=1–40|chapter=Digital Rhetoric and Globalization|doi=10.4018/978-1-4666-4916-3.ch001}}</ref> Due to this, there is always access to changing cultures and lifestyles, since there are so many different apps available to research or publish work.<ref name="Verhulsdonck-2014" /> Furthermore, mobile apps allow individual users to manage aspects of their lives, while the apps themselves are able to change and upgrade socially.<ref>{{Cite thesis|last=Rose|first=Jessica|title=The Rhetoric of the iPhone: A Cultural Gateway Of Our Transforming Digital Paradigm|date=August 12, 2016|url=https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/english_theses/205/|oclc=956496762|journal=English Theses}}</ref> |
|||
[[File:Tandberg Image Gallery - telepresence-t3-side-view-hires.jpg|thumb|Telepresence utilized in a professional setting for meetings]] |
|||
Information access on mobile devices poses challenges to [[user interface]]s, notably due to the small screen and keys (or lack thereof), in comparison to larger counterparts such as laptops and PCs. However, it also has the advantage of heightening physical interactivity with touch, and presents experiences with multiple senses in this way. Likewise, mobile technologies offer location-based affordances for layering different types of information in communication design.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Butts |first1=Shannon |last2=Jones |first2=Madison |date=May 20, 2021 |title=Deep mapping for environmental communication design |url=https://doi.org/10.1145/3437000.3437001 |journal=Communication Design Quarterly |volume=9 |issue=1 |pages=4–19 |doi=10.1145/3437000.3437001|s2cid=234794773 }}</ref> With these varying factors, mobile applications need trustworthy, reliable, and helpful [[UI design]] and [[UX design]] to create successful user experience.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Campbell|first=Jessica|title=The 39th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication |chapter=Mobile Interface Theory: A Conceptual Tool for Identifying Digital Rhetoric in a Mobile Context |date=October 12, 2021|pages=31–37|location=New York, NY|publisher=ACM|doi=10.1145/3472714.3473620|isbn=9781450386289|s2cid=238638870}}</ref> |
|||
==== Immersive media ==== |
|||
[[File:Virtual Reality military training.jpg|thumb|Members of the military using a virtual reality display for training ]] |
|||
Emerging immersive technologies such as [[virtual reality]] remove the visual presence of devices and mimic emotional experiences.<ref name="Greengard-2019">{{Cite book|last=Greengard|first=Samuel|title=Virtual Reality|publisher=The MIT Press|year=2019|location=Cambridge, Massachusetts|pages=xi-4}}</ref> User immersion into virtual reality includes simulated real-life communication; virtual reality provides the illusion of being somewhere the body physically is not, which contributes to widespread communication that reaches the point of [[telepresence]] and [[telexistence]].<ref name="Greengard-2019" /> Digital museums, serious games, and interactive documentaries often utilize virtual reality and augmented reality elements to relate users to historical settings and events, to teach them about the topic or to inform them of a specific point of view. While these are useful in conveying information in an immersive setting with an accessible narrative, those narratives can simplify the context to a point where some of the nuance is lost. Museums that employ immersive exhibits often find that tourist engage with these for the purpose of leisure, rather than wanting to gain thorough learning experience.<ref name=":3">{{Cite journal |last1=Basaraba |first1=Nicole |last2=Arnds |first2=Peter |last3=Edmond |first3=Jennifer |last4=Conlan |first4=Owen |date=2021 |title=New Media Ecology and Theoretical Foundations for Nonfiction Digital Narrative Creative Practice |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/809285 |journal=Narrative |volume=29 |issue=3 |pages=374–395 |doi=10.1353/nar.2021.0017 |issn=1538-974X}}</ref> |
|||
== Critical approaches == |
|||
=== Technofeminism === |
=== Technofeminism === |
||
{{Main|Technofeminism}} |
|||
Digital rhetoric gives a platform to technofeminism, a concept that brings together the intersections of [[gender]], [[capitalism]], and [[technology]].<ref name=":11">{{Cite journal |last=De Hertogh |first=Lori Beth |date=March 2019 |title='Feminist Leaning:' Tracing Technofeminist and Intersectional Practices and Values in Three Decades of Computers and Composition |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=51 |pages=4–13 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2018.11.004 |doi-access=free}}</ref> [[Intersectionality]] is a term coined by [[Kimberlé Crenshaw]] that recognizes the societal [[injustice]]s based on our identities.<ref name=":11" /> It is often challenging for women to navigate finding and interacting in digital spaces without [[harassment]] or gender biases.<ref name=":10">{{Cite journal |last=Haas |first=Angela |date=March 2019 |title=Introduction by the Guest Editors |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=51 |pages=1–3 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2018.11.007 |doi-access=free}}</ref> There is an importance of [[Internet activism|digital activism]] for unrepresented communities, such as [[Gender variance|gender non-conforming]] and [[transgender]] folx of all races, [[Disability|disabled]] folx, and [[Person of color|people of color]].<ref name=":10" /> In the journal ''Computers and Composition'' only five articles explicitly use the term [[intersectionality]] or technofeminism.<ref name=":11" /> Technofeminism advocates for equality for women in technology-heavy fields and researches the relationship between women and their devices. In addition, technofeminism and [[intersectionality]] are not as prevalent in upcoming technologies and research.<ref name=":11" /> |
|||
Digital rhetoric gives a platform to technofeminism, a concept that brings together the intersections of [[gender]], [[capitalism]], and [[technology]].<ref name="De Hertogh-2019">{{Cite journal |last=De Hertogh |first=Lori Beth |date=March 2019 |title='Feminist Leaning:' Tracing Technofeminist and Intersectional Practices and Values in Three Decades of Computers and Composition |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=51 |pages=4–13 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2018.11.004 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Technofeminism advocates for equality for women in technology-heavy fields and researches the relationship between women and their devices. [[Intersectionality]] is a term coined by [[Kimberlé Crenshaw]] that recognizes the societal [[injustice]]s based on our identities.<ref name="De Hertogh-2019" /> It is often challenging for women to navigate finding and interacting in digital spaces without [[harassment]] or gender biases.<ref name="Haas-2019">{{Cite journal |last=Haas |first=Angela |date=March 2019 |title=Introduction by the Guest Editors |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=51 |pages=1–3 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2018.11.007 |doi-access=free}}</ref> There is an importance of [[Internet activism|digital activism]] for unrepresented communities, such as [[Gender variance|gender non-conforming]] and [[transgender]] people of all races, [[Disability|disabled]] people, and [[Person of color|people of color]].<ref name="Haas-2019" /> |
|||
Technofeminism and intersectionality are still not very prevalent when developing new technologies and research. In the journal ''Computers and Composition'', only five articles explicitly use the term intersectionality or technofeminism.<ref name="De Hertogh-2019" /> Online feminism also faces challenges of reactive sexism and misogyny. In one example, of the over 600 million internet users in India, 63% users are male, with 39% being female. This contrast in users often makes these heavily male digital spaces hostile to women. While some feminist social media movements are able to inspire policy change or shine a light on issues facing women, others have been subject to severe backlashes with few achievements to show as a result, even if the movement reaches a wide audience.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pain |first=Paromita |date=November 2021 |title="It took me quite a long time to develop a voice": Examining feminist digital activism in the Indian #MeToo movement |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1461444820944846 |journal=New Media & Society |language=en |volume=23 |issue=11 |pages=3139–3155 |doi=10.1177/1461444820944846 |issn=1461-4448}}</ref> |
|||
=== Rhetorical feminism === |
|||
Cheryl Glenn, in her article "The Language of Rhetorical Feminism, Anchored in Hope", explores the study of rhetoric, feminism, and hope, introducing a theoretical framework she calls "rhetorical feminism". This framework began as a platform for recognizing and valuing the traditionally overlooked rhetorical practices and powers of marginalized groups called "Others". Glenn's approach is meant to challenge biased attitudes and actions, and promote a what some consider an inclusive and tolerant societal discourse.<ref name="Glenn-2020">{{cite journal |last=Glenn |first=Cheryl |year=2020 |title=The Language of Rhetorical Feminism, Anchored in Hope |journal=Open Linguistics |volume=6 |issue=1 |pages=334–343 |doi=10.1515/opli-2020-0023|s2cid=221158415 |doi-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
In connection to digital rhetoric, the article underscores the power of digital platforms in their ability to either facilitate or obstruct democratic dialogues. Glenn acknowledges the influence of rhetoric across traditional and digital domains to challenge systems seen as unjust and engage individuals in democratic practices. Glenn's stance within the article aligns with the broader narrative of digital rhetoric, which often explores the dynamics of power, representation, and access to digital platforms in molding public discourse.<ref name="Glenn-2020" /> |
|||
=== Digital cultural rhetoric === |
=== Digital cultural rhetoric === |
||
As the Internet has expanded, digital media or rhetoric has come to be used to represent or identify a culture. Scholars have studied how digital rhetoric is affected by one's personal factors, such as [[Race and ethnicity in the United States|race]], [[religion]], and sexuality. Due to these factors, people utilize different tools and absorb information differently.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> |
|||
Digital culture has created the need for specialized communities on the web. Computer-mediated communities such as [[Reddit]] can give a voice to these specialized communities. One can experience and converse with other like-minded people on the web via comment sections and shared online migration.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Blanchard |first=Anita |date=2004 |title=Blogs as Virtual Communities: Identifying a Sense of Community in the Julie/Julia Project |url=https://conservancy.umn.edu/items/46dc2c3e-ebeb-46ba-a45d-5962a4768d3b |journal=Into the Blogosphere |language=en}}</ref> The creation of digital cultural rhetoric has allowed for the use of online [[slang]] that other communities may not be aware of. Online communities that explore digital cultural rhetoric allow users to discover their social identity and confront stereotypes that they face (or faced).<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Duthely |first=Regina |date=April 3, 2017 |title=Black Feminist Hip-Hop Rhetorics and the Digital Public Sphere |journal=Changing English |volume=24 |issue=2 |pages=202–212 |doi=10.1080/1358684X.2017.1310458 |s2cid=148707986}}</ref> |
|||
=== Embodiment === |
|||
Embodiment is the idea that every person has a unique relationship with technology based on their unique set of identities. Studying the relationship between bodies and technology is one way that digital rhetoricians are able to promote equal access and opportunity within the digital sphere.<ref name="Haas 2018" /> Since technology is considered to be an extension of the real world, users are also shaped by the experiences they have in digital spaces. The artificial interactions that occur in online environments allow users to exist in a way that is additive to their human experience.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Lindemann |first1=Gesa |last2=Schünemann |first2=David |date=December 1, 2020 |title=Presence in Digital Spaces: A Phenomenological Concept of Presence in Mediatized Communication |journal=Human Studies |language=en |volume=43 |issue=4 |pages=627–651 |doi=10.1007/s10746-020-09567-y |s2cid=234389563 |issn=1572-851X|doi-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
=== Pedagogy === |
=== Pedagogy === |
||
With digital rhetoric becoming increasingly present, [[Pedagogy|pedagogical]] approaches have been proposed by scholars to teach |
With digital rhetoric becoming increasingly present, [[Pedagogy|pedagogical]] approaches have been proposed by scholars to teach digital rhetoric in the classroom. Courses in digital rhetoric study the [[intersectionality]] between users and digital material, as well as how different [[Demography|backgrounds]] such as age, ethnicity, and gender can affect these interactions.<ref name="Digital Rhetoric-2006">{{Cite journal|date=April 1, 2006|title=Teaching Digital Rhetoric: Community, Critical Engagement, and Application|journal=Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture|volume=6|issue=2|pages=231–259|doi=10.1215/15314200-2005-003|id={{Project MUSE|197069}}|s2cid=201766824}}</ref> Studies of digital pedagogy function as insight into the advantages and disadvantages of implementing digital technology in to education settings, and the consequences of incorrect use.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal |last1=Volkova |first1=Liliia V. |last2=Lizunova |first2=Larisa R. |last3=Komarova |first3=Iuliia A. |date=2021-12-30 |title=Digital pedagogy: Problems and solutions |url=https://periodicos.fclar.unesp.br/rpge/article/view/16003 |journal=Revista on line de Política e Gestão Educacional |language=en |pages=3140–3152 |doi=10.22633/rpge.v25iesp.5.16003 |issn=1519-9029|doi-access=free }}</ref> Examples include electronic libraries and databases,<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Volkova |first1=Liliia V. |last2=Lizunova |first2=Larisa R. |last3=Komarova |first3=Iuliia A. |date=2021-12-30 |title=Digital pedagogy: Problems and solutions |url=https://periodicos.fclar.unesp.br/rpge/article/view/16003 |journal=Revista on line de Política e Gestão Educacional |language=en |pages=3140–3152 |doi=10.22633/rpge.v25iesp.5.16003 |issn=1519-9029|doi-access=free }}</ref> as well as "thinking tools" used by students for the purposes of transcription, editing, and tagging of works.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Bryant |first1=John |last2=Isbell |first2=Mary |last3=Ohge |first3=Christopher |last4=Zimmer |first4=Mary Erica |date=2024-06-21 |title=Digital Editing and Pedagogy |journal=Scholarly Editing Journal |language=en |volume=41 |doi=10.55520/KBS01GGN |doi-access=free |issn=2167-1257}}</ref> Digital pedagogy is a wider scope of study than online pedagogy, focusing not only on the internet, but also on the devices and mediums of that convey the online communication.<ref name=":4" /> |
||
==== |
==== Higher education ==== |
||
Several scholars teach digital rhetoric courses at universities in the US, although their approaches vary considerably.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> Jeff Grabill,<ref name="MSU-2020">{{Cite web|title=Jeff Grabill {{!}} Office of the Provost {{!}} Michigan State University|url=https://provost.msu.edu/provosts/teachlearntech.html|access-date=February 13, 2020|website=provost.msu.edu}}</ref> a scholar with a background in English, education, and technology, encourages his contemporaries to find a bridge between the scholarly field of digital rhetoric and its implementation. Another rhetorician, Cheryl Ball, specializes in areas that consist of [[Multimodality|multimodal]] [[Composition studies|composition]] and [[editing]] practices, digital media scholarship, [[Electronic publishing|digital publishing]], and university writing pedagogy. Ball teaches students to write and compose multimodal texts by analyzing rhetorical options and choosing the most appropriate genres, technologies, media, and modes for a particular situation.<ref name="Dr">{{Cite web |title=Dr. Cheryl E. Ball |url=http://ceball.com/}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=External Review – Dr. Cheryl E. Ball |url=https://ceball.com/research/wvu-tenure/ |access-date=2024-11-03 |language=en-US}}</ref> Multimodality also influenced ''Understanding Rhetoric: A Graphic Guide to Writing'' by Elizabeth Losh (et al.), which emphasizes engaging the [[Comics|comic]] form of literacy.<ref name="Albrecht-Crane-2015">{{Cite journal|last=Albrecht-Crane|first=Christa|date=2015|title=Understanding Rhetoric: A Graphic Guide to Writing by Elizabeth Losh et al. (review)|journal=Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature|volume=69|issue=1|pages=104–107|id={{Project MUSE|580813}}}}</ref> A similar approach also inspired Melanie Gagich to alter the curriculum of her first-year English course completely, aiming to redefine digital projects as rigorous academic assignments and teach her students necessary audience analysis skills.<ref name="Gagich-2018">{{Cite web|last=Gagich|first=Melanie|date=June 7, 2018|title=Using Digital Rhetoric in a Multimodal Assignment to Disrupt Traditional Academic Writing: Conventions in a First-Year Writing Classroom|url=https://jitp.commons.gc.cuny.edu/?p|access-date=February 17, 2022|website=The Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, Issue 13|language=en}}</ref> Such a design ultimately allowed students in Gagich's classroom to develop their creativity and confidence as writers.<ref name="Gagich-2018" /> |
|||
In U.S. [[University|universities]], courses on digital rhetoric are taught at the [[Graduate school|graduate]] and [[Undergraduate education|undergraduate]] level in [[English studies|English]], [[Communication studies|Communication]], and [[Media studies|Media Studies]] departments. |
|||
In another approach, Douglas Eyman recommends a course in web authoring and [[Web design|design]] that provides undergraduates more practical instruction in the production and rhetorical understanding of digital texts; specifically, it provides opportunities for students to learn fundamentals of web writing and design conventions, rules, and procedures.<ref name="Eyman2015"/>{{Rp|171}} Similarly, Collin Bjork argues that "integrating digital rhetoric with [[usability testing]] can help researchers cultivate a more complex understanding of how students, instructors, and interfaces interact in OWI [online writing instruction]".<ref name="Bjork-2018">{{Cite journal|last=Bjork|first=Collin|date=September 1, 2018|title=Integrating Usability Testing with Digital Rhetoric in OWI|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S8755461518300240|journal=Computers and Composition|language=en|volume=49|pages=12|doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2018.05.009|issn=8755-4615|s2cid=196160668}}</ref> |
|||
Some [[scholar]]s actively support the inclusion of digital rhetoric in the classroom. In fact, Douglas Eyman indicates that there are many ways for digital rhetoric to be taught.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Eyman|first=Douglas|date=2015|title=Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice|url=https://quod.lib.umich.edu/d/dh/13030181.0001.001/1:7/--digital-rhetoric-theory-method-practice?g=dculture;rgn=div1;view=fulltext;xc=1|journal=Digital Humanities|language=en|doi=10.3998/dh.13030181.0001.001}}</ref> Jeff Grabill,<ref name=":21">{{Cite web|title=Jeff Grabill {{!}} Office of the Provost {{!}} Michigan State University|url=https://provost.msu.edu/provosts/teachlearntech.html|access-date=2020-02-13|website=provost.msu.edu}}</ref> a scholar with a background in English, education, and technology, encourages his contemporaries to find a bridge between the scholarly field of digital rhetoric and its implementation. Cheryl Ball<ref name=":25">{{Cite web|title=Dr. Cheryl E. Ball|url=http://ceball.com/}}</ref> specializes in areas that consist of [[Multimodality|multimodal]] [[Composition studies|composition]] and [[editing]] practices, digital media scholarship, [[Electronic publishing|digital publishing]], and university writing [[pedagogy]]. Ball teaches people to write and compose multimodal texts by analyzing rhetorical options and choosing the most appropriate genres, [[Technology|technologies]], media, and modes for a particular situation. During her own education, Ball made significant advances in the digital rhetoric field by completing her school's first electronic and interactive [[thesis]]. She also received [[Academic tenure|tenure]] at another university using the first all-digital tenure portfolio. In another approach, Douglas Eyman recommends a course in web authoring and [[Web design|design]] that provides undergraduates more practical instruction in the production and rhetorical understanding of digital texts. Moreover, he explains that web authoring and design for digital rhetoric instruction provides opportunities for students to learn fundamentals of web writing and design conventions, rules and procedures.<ref name=":27">{{Cite book|last=Eyman|first=Douglas|title=Digital rhetoric: Theory, Method, and Practice|publisher=University of Michigan Press|year=2015|isbn=978-0-472-07268-2|pages=171}}</ref> Attention to multimodality has also influenced ''Understanding Rhetoric: A Graphic Guide to Writing'' by Elizabeth Losh et al., which emphasized engaging the [[Comics|comic]] form of literacy.<ref name=":28">{{Cite journal|last=Albrecht-Crane|first=Christa|date=2015|title=Understanding Rhetoric: A Graphic Guide to Writing by Elizabeth Losh et al. (review)|journal=Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature|volume=69|issue=1|pages=104–107|id={{Project MUSE|580813}}}}</ref> Furthermore, scholar Dr. Melanie Kill introduces digital rhetoric to college-aged students, arguing for the importance of editing [[Wikipedia]] and capitalizing on their privilege of education and access to materials.<ref name=":30">{{Citation|last=Kill|first=Melanie|title=16. Teaching Digital Rhetoric: Wikipedia, Collaboration, and the Politics of Free Knowledge|date=2015-06-01|url=http://books.openedition.org/obp/1658|work=Digital Humanities Pedagogy : Practices, Principles and Politics|pages=389–405|editor-last=Hirsch|editor-first=Brett D.|series=Digital Humanities Series|place=Cambridge|publisher=Open Book Publishers|language=en|isbn=978-2-8218-5403-1|access-date=2022-02-15}}</ref> Similar to De Hertogh et. al. and Haas, Dr. Kill believes an education in digital rhetoric serves all students, as it facilitates positive social change.<ref name=":30" /> |
|||
Other scholars focus more on the relationship between digital rhetoric and social impact. Scholars Lori Beth De Hertogh (et al.) and Angela Haas have published materials discussing intersectionality and digital rhetoric, arguing that the two are inseparable and classes covering digital rhetoric must also explore intersectionality.<ref name="Haas 2018" /><ref name="De Hertogh-2019" /> [[Iowa State University|Iowa State's]] Lauren Malone has also analyzed the relationship between identity and teaching digital rhetoric through research on online engagement of queer and transgender people of color.<ref name="Malone-2020">{{Cite thesis|title=Intersectional digital rhetoric pedagogy: Queer & trans people of color and digital platform engagement|publisher=Iowa State University|first=Lauren Ashley|last=Malone|year=2020 |doi=10.31274/etd-20200624-193|doi-access=free}}</ref> From this research, Malone created a series of steps for digital rhetoric instructors to take in order to foster inclusivity within their classrooms.<ref name="Malone-2020" /> In her work, scholar Melanie Kill has introduced digital rhetoric to college-aged students, arguing for the importance of editing [[Wikipedia]] and capitalizing on their privilege of education and access to materials.<ref name="Kill-2015">{{Citation|last=Kill|first=Melanie|title=16. Teaching Digital Rhetoric: Wikipedia, Collaboration, and the Politics of Free Knowledge|date=June 1, 2015|url=http://books.openedition.org/obp/1658|work=Digital Humanities Pedagogy : Practices, Principles and Politics|pages=389–405|editor-last=Hirsch|editor-first=Brett D.|series=Digital Humanities Series|place=Cambridge|publisher=Open Book Publishers|language=en|isbn=978-2-8218-5403-1|access-date=February 15, 2022}}</ref> Similar to De Hertogh (et al.) and Haas, Kill believes an education in digital rhetoric serves all students, as it facilitates positive social change.<ref name="Kill-2015" /> |
|||
Digital rhetoric is also important in teaching composition online. While many studies of online writing instruction (OWI) foreground issues of usability, Collin Bjork argues that "integrating digital rhetoric with [[usability testing]] can help researchers cultivate a more complex understanding of how students, instructors, and interfaces interact in OWI."<ref name=":29">{{Cite journal|last=Bjork|first=Collin|date=2018-09-01|title=Integrating Usability Testing with Digital Rhetoric in OWI|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S8755461518300240|journal=Computers and Composition|language=en|volume=49|pages=12|doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2018.05.009|issn=8755-4615}}</ref> |
|||
==== |
==== K–12 ==== |
||
Scholar [[Ian Bogost]] suggests that [[video game]]s can be utilized in a multitude of subjects to be studied as models of our non-digital world. Specifically, they note that video games could be used as an "entry point" for students that may not have been interested in [[computer science]] to enter that field. Additionally, they note that video games can be taught as rhetorical and expressive in nature, allowing children to model their experiences through programming. And scholar Collin Bjork makes a series of recommendations for integrating digital rhetoric with [[usability testing]] in online writing instruction. |
|||
Many educational systems are framed so that students actively participate in technological systems as designers of digital rhetoric, not passive users.<ref name="Eyman-2015" /> There are three core goals students have identified for their coursework: building their own digital space, learning all aspects of digital rhetoric (including the theory, technology, and uses), and applying it in their own lives. The ecological system generated by the interactions of students with classmates, digital media, and other individuals is the basis of "interconnected" rhetorical processes and shared digital work.<ref name="Eyman-2015" />[[File:VideoGame.jpg|thumb|Code for a computer video game |333x333px]] |
|||
== Concepts == |
|||
===Circulation=== |
|||
[[File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-en 6m articles 270 white.png|alt=Wikipedia's globe logo with a red banner across the bottom that says, "6,000,000 articles," and below that Wikipedia's motto, "The free encyclopedia."|thumb|Wikipedia, as an online encyclopedia that relies on collaborative writing, and therefore collaborative rhetorical contribution, provides examples of the concepts of circulation in action.]] |
|||
[[Rhetorical circulation|Circulation]] theorizes the ways that text and discourse moves through time and space, and any kind of media can be circulated. A new form of communication is composed, created, and distributed through digital technologies. Media scholar [[Henry Jenkins]] explains there is a shift from distribution to circulation, which signals a move toward an increasingly participatory model of culture in which people shape, share, re-frame and remix media content in ways not previously possible within the traditional rhetorical formats like print. The various concepts of circulation include: |
|||
Video games are one avenue through which students learn to design the rhetoric and code underlying their technological systems. Video game use has evolved rapidly since the 1980s, and current video games have been incorporated into education.<ref name="Maza-2020">{{Cite journal|last=Maza|first=Antonio José Planells de la|date=2020|title=Los videojuegos como mundos ludoficcionales críticos: el caso de la crisis política española en el ocio digital móvil (2008–2015)|url=http://www.comunicacionysociedad.cucsh.udg.mx/index.php/comsoc/article/view/e7365|journal=Comunicación y Sociedad|language=es|pages=1–16|doi=10.32870/cys.v2020.7365|s2cid=225686398|issn=2448-9042|doi-access=free}}</ref> Scholar [[Ian Bogost]] suggests that video games can be utilized in a multitude of subjects to serve as models for studying the non-digital world. Specifically, he notes that video games could be used as an "entry point" into [[computer science]] for students who may not have been interested in the field. Games and game technology enhance learning by operating at the "outer and growing edge of a player's competence".<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|last=Gee|first=James Paul|date=May 2004|title=What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy|journal=Education + Training|volume=46|issue=4|doi=10.1108/et.2004.00446dae.002|issn=0040-0912|via=St. Martin's Griffen}}</ref> Games challenge students at levels that cause frustration but preserve motivation to solve the challenge at this edge.<ref name=":7" /> |
|||
* ''Collaboration'' – Digital rhetoric has taken on a very collaborative nature through the use of digital platforms. Sites such as YouTube and Wikipedia involve opportunity for "new forms of collaborative production".<ref name=":8">Wittke, Volker, and Heidemarie Hanekop. ''New Forms of Collaborative Innovation and Production on the Internet : An Interdisciplinary Perspective''. Universitätsverlag Göttingen, 2011.</ref> Digital platforms have created opportunities for more people to enact and create, as digital platforms open doors for collaborative communication that can be occur synchronously, asynchronously, over far distances, and across multiple disciplines and professions.<ref name=":8" /><ref name=":13">Olson, Judith S, and Gary M Olson. ''Working Together Apart : Collaboration Over the Internet''. Morgan & Claypool, 2014.{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> |
|||
* ''Crowdsourcing'' – Daren Brabham describes the concept of crowdsourcing as the use of modern technology to collaborate, create, and solve problems collectively.<ref>Brabham, Daren C. ''Crowdsourcing''. MIT Press, 2013.</ref> However, [[Ethics|ethical]] concerns have been raised as well while engaging in crowdsourcing without a clear set of compensation practices or protections in place to secure information. |
|||
* ''Delivery'' – Whereas rhetoric once relied largely on oral methods, the rise of digital technologies allows rhetoric to be delivered in new "electronic forms of discourse".<ref name=":14">{{Cite book |last=Welch |first=Kathleen E. |title=Electric Rhetoric: Classical Rhetoric, Oralism, and a New Literacy |last2=Barrett |first2=Edward |date=1999 |publisher=MIT Press |isbn=978-0-262-23202-9}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> Acts and modes of communication can be represented digitally by combining multiple different forms of media into a composite helping to create an easy user experience .<ref name=":18">Chapman, Nigel, and Jenny Chapman. ''Digital Multimedia''. John Wiley & Sons, LTD., 2000.{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> The growing popularity of the internet [[meme]] is an example of combining, circulating, and delivering media in a collaborative effort through file sharing. Although memes are sent through micro transactions - they often can have a macro large scale impact.<ref name="Shifman 2014">{{Cite book |last=Shifman |first=Limor |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cZI9AQAAQBAJ&q=rhetoric+memes&pg=PP8 |title=Memes in Digital Culture |date=2014 |publisher=MIT Press |isbn=978-0-262-52543-5 |language=en}}</ref> Another form of unique rhetorical delivery is the online encyclopedia which traditionally have been print form based primarily on text and images. However, modern technological developments now enable encyclopedias to integrate sound, animation, video, algorithmic search functions, and high-level productions into a cohesive multimedia experience as part of their new forms of digital rhetoric.<ref name=":18" /> |
|||
Bogost also notes that video games can be taught as rhetorical and expressive in nature, allowing children to model their experiences through programming. When dissected, the ethics and rhetoric in video games' computational systems is exposed.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Boyle|first1=Casey|last2=Brown|first2=James J.|last3=Ceraso|first3=Steph|date=May 27, 2018|title=The Digital: Rhetoric Behind and Beyond the Screen|journal=Rhetoric Society Quarterly|volume=48|issue=3|pages=251–259|doi=10.1080/02773945.2018.1454187|s2cid=149842629|issn=0277-3945}}</ref> Analysis of video games as an interactive medium reveals the underlying rhetoric through the performative activity of the player.<ref name="Maza-2020" /> Recognition of procedural rhetoric through course studies reflects how these mediums can augment politics, advertisement, and information.<ref name="Maza-2020" /> To help address the rhetoric in video game code, scholar Collin Bjork makes a series of recommendations for integrating digital rhetoric with [[usability testing]] in online writing instruction.<ref name="Bjork-2018" /> |
|||
=== Critical literacy === |
|||
[[Critical literacy]] is a line of thought that assumes all texts are [[bias]]ed.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Giselsson |first=Kristi |date=31 May 2020 |title=Critical Thinking and Critical Literacy: Mutually Exclusive? |journal=International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning |volume=14 |issue=1 |doi=10.20429/ijsotl.2020.140105 |doi-access=free}}</ref> For example, a study conducted at the Indiana University in Bloomington used algorithms to assess 14 million Twitter messages containing statements about the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and election. They found that from May 2016 to March 2017, [[social bot]]s were responsible for causing approximately 389,000 unsupported political claims to go viral.<ref>Shao, Chencheng, et al. "The Spread of Fake News by Social Bots". ''Andy Black Associates'', 2017, andyblackassociates.co.uk.</ref> |
|||
Some scholars have also identified specific practices for digital rhetoric instruction in pre-collegiate classrooms. As Douglas Eyman points out, students require agency when learning digital rhetoric, meaning instructors designing lessons must allow students to interact with the technology directly and enact change on the design.<ref name="Eyman-2015" /> This is consistent with discoveries by other professors, who claim one of the primary goals of students in a digital rhetoric classroom is to create space for themselves, connections with peers, and deeply understand its significance.<ref name="Digital Rhetoric-2006" /> These interpersonal connections reflect a "thick correlation between digitalization and empowering pedagogy".<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Salmieri|first=Luca|date=2019|title=The Rhetoric of Digitalization in Italian Educational Policies: Situating Reception among Digitally Skilled Teachers|journal=Italian Journal of Sociology of Education|volume=11|issue=2/2019|pages=162–183|doi=10.14658/pupj-ijse-2019-1-8|issn=2035-4983}}</ref> |
|||
=== Interactivity === |
|||
In regards to digital rhetoric, [[interactivity]] can be defined as the ways in which readers connect to and communicate with digital texts. For example, readers have the ability to like, share, repost, comment on, and remix online content. These simple interactions allow writers, scholars, and content creators to get a better idea of how their work is affecting their audience.<ref name=":9" /> |
|||
====Pre-K==== |
|||
Ways communicators promote interactivity consist of the following: |
|||
The United States Government's Office of Educational Technology has emphasized four guiding principles when using technology with early learners: |
|||
* ''[[Mind share|Mind sharing]]'' is a way to get collective intelligence—crowd wisdom that is comparable to expert wisdom. The methodology consists of taking a consensus from the crowd—the answer that most minds are suggesting is the best answer. If it's a numeric question (like guessing the weight of an ox), it's a calculated average or median. If it's an open question (like "what car should I buy?"), it's the most common answer. |
|||
* ''[[Multimodality]]'' is a form of communication that uses multiple methods (or modes) to inform audiences of an idea. It can involve a mix of written text, pictures, audio, or videos. Online journals often embrace multimodality in their issues and articles by publishing works that use more than just written text to communicate the message. While the digital turn in rhetoric and composition has encouraged more discussion, theorization, and [[Pedagogy|pedagogical]] application of multimodality and multimodal texts, the history of the field demonstrates a continuous concern with multimodal communication beginning with classical rhetoric's concern with delivery, gesture, and memory. All writing and all communication is, theoretically, multimodal. |
|||
* ''[[Remix culture|Remix]]'' is a method of digital rhetoric that manipulates and transforms an original work to convey a new message. The use of remix can help the creator make an argument by connecting seemingly unrelated ideas into a convincing whole. As modern technology develops, self-publication sites such as: YouTube, SoundCloud, and [[WordPress]] have stimulated remix culture, allowing for easier creation and dissemination of reworked content. Unlike appropriation, which is the use and potential recontextualization of existing material without significant modification, remix is defined in Kairos as "the process of taking old pieces of text, images, sounds, and video and stitching them together to form a new product".<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ridolfo |first=Jim |last2=Devoss |first2=Dànielle Nicole |year=2009 |title=Composing for Recomposition: Rhetorical Velocity and Delivery |url=https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/13.2/topoi/ridolfo_devoss/intro.html |journal=Kairos |volume=13 |issue=2}}</ref> A popular example of remixing is the creation and sharing of [[meme]]s. |
|||
# When used appropriately, technology can be a tool for learning. |
|||
=== Visual rhetoric === |
|||
# The use of technology should allow for increased access to learning opportunities for all children. |
|||
Digital rhetoric often invokes [[visual rhetoric]] due to digital rhetoric's reliance on visuals.<ref name="Eyman2015" /> Visual rhetoric is defined as using imagery to represent rhetoric, which can be difficult to differentiate online, requiring careful analysis of viewer, situational, and visual contexts.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Hocks |first=Mary E. |date=2003 |title=Understanding Visual Rhetoric in Digital Writing Environments |journal=College Composition and Communication |volume=54 |issue=4 |pages=629–656 |doi=10.2307/3594188 |jstor=3594188 |s2cid=142341944}}</ref> Abstract ideas in rhetorical images, as Charles Hill states, are not only acceptably represented in images, but they are prominent; images "do not necessarily have to portray an object, or even a class of objects, that exists or ever did exist".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Handa, C. |title=Visual rhetoric in a digital world: A critical sourcebook |publisher=Bedford/St. Martins |year=2004 |location=Boston |chapter=Reading the Visual in College Writing Classes By Charles Hill}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> Hill uses the [[Peace symbols|peace sign]], [[swastika]], and the [[Flags of the Confederate States of America|Confederate flags]] as examples of abstract ideas represented by images. Ironically the image of a peace sign, which seems to be universally accepted as a call from the 1970s [[History of the hippie movement|'hippie' movement]], originated as an anti-Christian [[symbol]]. The original [[Graphics|graphic]] was used to show an upside down broken [[Christian cross|cross]] symbolizing the despair of man and the [[crucifixion]] of the [[Saint Peter|Apostle Peter]]. |
|||
# Technology can be used to strengthen relationships between children and their families, early educators, and friends. |
|||
# Technology is most effective when early learners are interacting with adults and peers. Adults can also supervise children online for said effectiveness.<ref name="Office of Educational Technology-2022">{{Cite web |title=Guiding Principles for Use of Technology with Early Learners |url=https://tech.ed.gov/earlylearning/principles/ |access-date=February 28, 2022 |website=Office of Educational Technology |language=en-US}}</ref> |
|||
Despite these four pillars, most studies conclude that learning technology for children under the age of two is not beneficial. At most, technology can be used to promote relationship development for these children; for instance, by using video chat software to connect with loved ones at a distance.<ref name="Office of Educational Technology-2022" /> |
|||
=== Digital rhetoric as a field of study === |
|||
The concept of the [[Avatar (computing)|avatar]] can also aid understanding of visual rhetoric's impact. James E. Porter defines avatar as a "virtual body".<ref name="Porter" /> While scholars such as Beth Kolko hoped for an online world without physical barriers, making it a "realm of ideas", there are still [[social issue]]s, such as [[gender discrimination]] and [[racism]].<ref name="Kolko">{{Cite journal |last=Kolko |first=Beth E. |date=August 1999 |title=Representing Bodies in Virtual Space: The Rhetoric of Avatar Design |journal=The Information Society |volume=15 |issue=3 |pages=177–186 |doi=10.1080/019722499128484}}</ref> Beth E. Kolko believes that an idealistic online world would be a "realm of ideas", without definitive factors such as gender, race, or age. Kolko argues that a non-[[gender]]ed online world would not garner enough attention, because individuals could not relate to each other without [[gender identity]].<ref name="Kolko" /> Victoria Woolums found in a study of the video game [[World of Warcraft]] that the gender identity of the avatar affected behaviors of other characters, showing a [[bias]] even in a realm where [[gender identity]] of an avatar may not be physically accurate to its user.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Woolums |first=Viola |date=Fall 2011 |title=Gendered Avatar Identity |url=https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/16.1/topoi/woolums/ |journal=Kairos |volume=16 |issue=1}}</ref> |
|||
In 2009, rhetorician [[Elizabeth Losh]]<ref name="losh.ucsd.edu">{{Cite web|title=Elizabeth Losh|url=http://losh.ucsd.edu/|website=losh.ucsd.edu}}</ref> offered this four-part definition of digital rhetoric in her book ''Virtualpolitik'':<ref>{{Cite book|last=Losh, E.|url=http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/virtualpolitik|title=Virtualpolitik|publisher=MIT Press|year=2009|isbn=978-0-262-12304-4}}</ref> |
|||
# The conventions of new digital genres that are used for everyday discourse, as well as for special occasions, in average people's lives. |
|||
# [[Public rhetoric]], often in the form of political messages from government institutions, that is represented or recorded through digital technology and disseminated via electronically distributed networks. |
|||
# The emerging scholarly [[Discipline (academia)|discipline]] concerned with the rhetorical interpretation of computer-generated media as objects of study. |
|||
# Mathematical theories of communication from the field of [[information science]], many of which attempt to quantify the amount of uncertainty in a given linguistic exchange or the likely paths through which messages travel.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Losh|first=Elizabeth|url=http://gossettphd.org/library/losh_hackingaristotle.pdf|title=Virtualpolitik: An Electronic History of Government Media-Making in a Time of War, Scandal, Disaster, Miscommunication, and Mistakes|date=2009|publisher=MIT|pages=47–48|access-date=April 24, 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141023101108/http://gossettphd.org/library/losh_hackingaristotle.pdf|archive-date=October 23, 2014}}</ref> |
|||
Losh's definition demonstrates that digital rhetoric is a field that relies on different methods to study various types of information, such as code, text, visuals, videos, and so on.<ref name="losh.ucsd.edu" /> |
|||
== Social Issues == |
|||
===Access=== |
|||
Referred to as the [[digital divide]], issues of [[Economic inequality|economic]] access and user-level access are recurring issues in digital rhetoric.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Lohr |first=Steve |date=4 December 2018 |title=Digital Divide Is Wider Than We Think, Study Says |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/04/technology/digital-divide-us-fcc-microsoft.html}}</ref> These issues show up most prevalently in [[computers and writing]] circles. Access can refer to inequality in the access of information, access to a reading public, access to means of communicating, and access to opportunities. For those that teach digital rhetoric in schools and universities, student access to technologies at home and in school is an operative concern.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Reynolds |first=Thomas J. |last2=Lewis |first2=Charles R. |date=January 1997 |title=The changing topography of computer access for composition students |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=14 |issue=2 |pages=269–278 |doi=10.1016/S8755-4615(97)90027-X}}</ref> There is some debate about whether [[Mobile device|mobile computing devices]] like smartphones make technology access more equitable.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Going Wireless: A Critical Exploration of Wireless and Mobile Technologies for Composition Teachers and Researchers |publisher=Hampton Press |year=2009 |editor-last=Hea, Amy C.K. |location=Cresskill, N.J. |pages=15–33}}</ref> In addition, the socioeconomic divide that is created due to accessibility is a major factor of digital rhetoric. For instance, [https://www.nih.gov/ NIH] researcher and a professor of education at Stanford University, [[Linda Darling-Hammond]] discusses the lack of educational resources that children of color in America face.<ref name=":3">{{Cite book |last=Smedley |first=Brian D. |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK223640/ |title=Inequality in Teaching and Schooling: How Opportunity Is Rationed to Students of Color in America |last2=Stith |first2=Adrienne Y. |last3=Colburn |first3=Lois |last4=Evans |first4=Clyde H. |last5=Medicine (US) |first5=Institute of |date=2001 |publisher=National Academies Press (US) |language=en}}</ref> Further, [https://cas.illinoisstate.edu/faculty_staff/profile.php?ulid=ahaas Angela M. Haas], author of ''"Wampum as Hypertext: An American Indian Intellectual Tradition of Multimedia Theory and Practice"'', describes access in a more theoretical way. Her text explains that through access one can connect a physical body with the digital space.<ref name="Wampum as Hypertext: An American In" /> Technology diffusion is also a contributing factor, which refers to how the market for new technology changes over time and how that influences technology use and production across society.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Wattal|first=Sunil|last2=Hong|first2=Yili|last3=Mandviwalla|first3=Munir|last4=Jain|first4=Abhijit|date=January 2011|title=Technology Diffusion in the Society: Analyzing Digital Divide in the Context of Social Class|url=https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/5718600?casa_token=2rLk_ewM6ykAAAAA:iM90aSR4-J0Y-WZvXPEcHipneY-08gm98Em2etdLXDjMdBruawsuhIwY9wNpwYyYZjIz2cNEb-eg|journal=2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences|pages=1–10|doi=10.1109/HICSS.2011.398}}</ref> Studies conducted by scholar Sunil Wattal conclude that technology diffusion mimics social class status. As such, technology diffusion varies from community to community, making it a much greater challenge to ensure access equity across classes. These examples preface the topic that access encompasses every aspect of ones life and must be perceived as such. If accessibility is not resolved at a foundational level then social discrimination will be further perpetuated.<ref name=":3" /> |
|||
Douglas Eyman suggests that classical theories can be mapped onto digital media but a larger academic focus should be placed on the "extension of rhetorical theory".<ref name="enculturation.net-2022">{{Cite web|title=Looking Back and Looking Forward: Digital Rhetoric as Evolving Field {{!}} enculturation|url=http://enculturation.net/looking-back-and-looking-forward|access-date=February 24, 2022|website=enculturation.net}}</ref> Careers in developing and analyzing the rhetoric in code form a prominent field of study. ''Computers and Composition'', a journal established in 1985, focuses on computer communication and has considered the use of "rhetoric as their conceptual framework" and the digital rhetoric in software development.<ref name="enculturation.net-2022" /> |
|||
Another issue of access comes in the form of [[paywall]]s, which are a major hindrance for education and reduce accessibility to educational tools and materials. This practice increase barriers to scholarship and limits information that is [[open access]].<ref name=":2">{{Cite web |last=Resnick |first=Brian |date=2019-06-03 |title=The war to free science |url=https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/6/3/18271538/open-access-elsevier-california-sci-hub-academic-paywalls |access-date=2021-02-17 |website=Vox |language=en}}</ref> This industry has gotten flack for its long history of monopolizing the publishing market and forcing universities to pay over $11 million annually for access to certain works.<ref name=":2" /> [[Open access]] has removed the barriers of fees associated with accessing a work and the restrictions of copyright and licensing. The matter of eliminating fees is most prevalent to digital rhetoric, because it allows for more access to works. Open access and digital rhetoric do not eliminate copyright, but they eliminate restrictions by giving authors the choice to maintain their right to copy and distribute their materials however they choose, or they may turn the rights over to a specific journal. Digital rhetoric involves works that are found online and open access is allowing more people to be able to reach these works.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Steinhart |first=Gail |title=LibGuides: Open Access Publishing : What is Open Access? |url=https://guides.library.cornell.edu/openaccess/home |access-date=2021-02-17 |website=guides.library.cornell.edu |language=en}}</ref> |
|||
Studies on how digital rhetoric implicates various topics are ongoing and encompass many fields. In his book, ''Digital Griots: African American Rhetoric in a Multimedia Age'', [[Adam J. Banks]] states that modern day storytellers, like stand-up comics and spoken word poets, give African American rhetoric a flexible approach that is still true to tradition.<ref>{{Cite book|last=Banks|first=Adam J|title=Digital griots: African American rhetoric in a multimedia age|date=2011|publisher=Southern Illinois University Press|isbn=978-0-8093-3020-1|oclc=977841399}}{{page needed|date=May 2021}}</ref> While digital rhetoric can be used to facilitate traditions, select cultures face several practical application issues. [[Radhika Gajjala]], professor at [[Bowling Green State University]], writes that South Asian cyber feminists face issues with regard to building their web presence.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Gajjala|first=Radhika|date=March 2003|title=South Asian digital diasporas and cyberfeminist webs: negotiating globalization, nation, gender and information technology design|journal=Contemporary South Asia|volume=12|issue=1|pages=41–56|doi=10.1080/0958493032000123362|s2cid=143325390}}</ref> |
|||
=== Politics === |
|||
The increase in [[Digitization|digitalization]] of media has amplified the importance of digital rhetoric in politics as it has introduced a new relationship between politicians and the citizenry. Digital communication platforms and [[List of social networking websites|social networking sites]] (SNS) are means of allowing citizens to share information and engage in debate with other people of similar or distinct political [[Ideology|ideologies]]. The topics and ideas communicated through digital rhetoric have been shown to influence and predict the political behavior of individuals outside the digital world.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Himelboim|first=Itai|last2=Lariscy|first2=Ruthann Weaver|last3=Tinkham|first3=Spencer F.|last4=Sweetser|first4=Kaye D.|date=29 February 2012|title=Social Media and Online Political Communication: The Role of Interpersonal Informational Trust and Openness|journal=Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media|volume=56|issue=1|pages=92–115|doi=10.1080/08838151.2011.648682|s2cid=144127370}}</ref> Politicians have been known to use digital rhetoric as a tool to communicate information to the citizens. Reciprocally, digital rhetoric has enabled increasing political participation among citizens. In 2008, the first wide scale [[political campaign]] through Twitter was conducted by [[President of the United States|presidential]] then-candidate [[Barack Obama]]. Social media has become a significant asset for political candidates and is currently used by many. Accordingly, the [[2016 United States elections]] brought social media to the forefront, and all [[Candidate|presidential candidates]] utilized different forms of [[persuasion]] in their 140 character tweets. During the election cycle, candidates would post 5-7 times and would tweet 11-12 times a day.<ref name=":4">{{Cite journal|last=Williams|first=Christine B.|date=2 October 2017|title=Introduction: Social Media, Political Marketing and the 2016 U.S. Election|journal=Journal of Political Marketing|volume=16|issue=3–4|pages=207–211|doi=10.1080/15377857.2017.1345828|doi-access=free}}</ref> |
|||
==== Research ethics ==== |
|||
Theoretical research on digital rhetoric in politics has attributed the increase of political participation to three models: the motivation model, the learning model, and the attitude model. |
|||
Writing and rhetoric scholars Heidi McKee and James E. Porter discuss the complicated issue of Internet users posting information publicly on the Internet but expecting the post to be semi-private. This appears contradictory, but socially the Internet is composed of millions of [[Social identity theory|social identities]], [[social group]]s, [[social norm]]s, and [[social influence]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=McKee |first1=Heidi |last2=Porter |first2=James E. |date=2008 |title=The Ethics of Digital Writing Research: A Rhetorical Approach |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/20457031 |journal=College Composition and Communication |volume=59 |issue=4 |pages=711–749 |doi=10.58680/ccc20086675 |jstor=20457031 |issn=0010-096X}}</ref> These social aspects of the Internet are important to consider when studying digital topics because the digital and non-digital are getting harder to distinguish from one another.<ref name="Goodyear-2017">{{Cite journal |last=Goodyear |first=Victoria A. |date=May 27, 2017 |title=Social media, apps and wearable technologies: navigating ethical dilemmas and procedures |journal=Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health |volume=9 |issue=3 |pages=285–302 |doi=10.1080/2159676X.2017.1303790 |s2cid=151680280 |issn=2159-676X|url=https://research.birmingham.ac.uk/portal/en/publications/social-media-apps-and-wearable-technologies(15733535-fe50-466b-9595-8ab60218726f).html }}</ref> |
|||
A study conducted by Rösner and Krämer in 2016 showed that participants' identities would reflect the norms of these online social groups. Similar to how social groups are seen in an in-person setting, posts on forums, comment sections, and social media are like having a conversation with friends in a public setting. Typically, researchers would not use a conversation heard in public, but an online conversation is not only available to its social group.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Rösner |first1=Leonie |last2=Krämer |first2=Nicole C. |date=July 2016 |title=Verbal Venting in the Social Web: Effects of Anonymity and Group Norms on Aggressive Language Use in Online Comments |journal=Social Media + Society |language=en |volume=2 |issue=3 |doi=10.1177/2056305116664220 |doi-access=free |issn=2056-3051}}</ref> James Zappen, in his article "Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory", adds that many of these groups foster a creative and collaborative nature to share information to the public.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Zappen |first=James P. |date=July 2005 |title=Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory |journal=Technical Communication Quarterly |language=en |volume=14 |issue=3 |pages=319–325 |doi=10.1207/s15427625tcq1403_10 |s2cid=54783060 |issn=1057-2252}}</ref> |
|||
* The motivation model proposes that digital rhetoric has decreased the opportunity costs of participating in politics since it makes information readily available to the people. |
|||
* The learning model established the increase in political participation to the vast amount of political information available on the internet which increases the inclusion of the citizens in the political process. |
|||
* The attitude model extended from the previous two by suggesting that digital rhetoric has changed the perception of citizens towards politics, particularly by providing interactive tools that allow people to engage in the political process.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Jiang|first=Liang|date=2 October 2017|title=Why context matters: the role of campaign context in the relationship between digital media use and political participation|journal=Australian Journal of Political Science|volume=52|issue=4|pages=580–598|doi=10.1080/10361146.2017.1373064|s2cid=158661419}}</ref> |
|||
McKee and Porter suggest the use of a [[Casuistry|casuistic]] [[heuristic]] approach to doing digital research. This method of study is based on focusing on the moral principle of '[[Harm principle|do no harm]]' to the audience and generating needed formulas or diagrams to help guide the researcher when gathering data. It is noted that this method does not provide all the answers. Instead, it is a starting point for the scholar to approach the digital world. More scholars have added their own take to an ethical approach for digital data. Many have a case-based approach with add-on consent from participants (if possible), anonymity to participants, and consideration of what harm could come to the groups being studied.<ref name="Goodyear-2017" /><ref>{{Cite book |title=The ethics of online research |date=2018 |editor=Kandy Woodfield |isbn=978-1-78714-485-9 |location=Bingley, UK |publisher=Emerald Group Publishing|oclc=1020570628}}</ref> |
|||
[[File:President Obama facebook post on Merrick Garland to Supreme Court.jpg|thumb|President Barack Obama's [[Facebook]] post on Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. The text was later reposted to [[Twitter]].]] |
|||
Social media incorporates numerous characteristics of interactions between people in the [[public sphere]]. Social media is not characterized as an ideal public sphere because it fails to provide equitable access to information and participation for women and [[minority group]]s.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kruse|first=Lisa M.|last2=Norris|first2=Dawn R.|last3=Flinchum|first3=Jonathan R.|date=2 January 2018|title=Social Media as a Public Sphere? Politics on Social Media|journal=The Sociological Quarterly|volume=59|issue=1|pages=62–84|doi=10.1080/00380253.2017.1383143|s2cid=149334357}}</ref> Nevertheless, social media has been shown useful for the propagation of digital rhetoric for political campaigns as shown in Obama's 2008 and 2012 presidential campaigns in which digital rhetoric made its first successful appearance at a U.S presidential election — which marked a guideline for future elections.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Iosifidis|first=Petros|last2=Wheeler|first2=Mark|date=3 April 2018|title=Modern Political Communication and Web 2.0 in Representative Democracies|url=http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/id/eprint/18855/1/Modern%20Political%20Communication%20and%20Web%202.0%20in%20Representative%20Democracies.pdf|journal=Javnost - the Public|volume=25|issue=1–2|pages=110–118|doi=10.1080/13183222.2018.1418962|s2cid=149409300}}</ref> The presence of digital media companies such as Facebook, [[Microsoft]], [[Google]], and Twitter has been well established in the promotion of digital rhetoric for political purposes. These firms have influenced the political process by providing strategic information about people's [[demographics]], behaviors, attitudes, and interests, all of which have increased the efficiency of political [[discourse]] — especially for political campaigns. In 2013, Twitter released a manual targeted towards politicians that outlined the main features of their platform and how they can be used to increase [[political communication]]s.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Twitter Has A 136-Page Handbook For Politicians And It's Hilarious|url=https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/09/30/443128829/twitter-has-a-136-page-handbook-for-politicians-140-character-tweets|access-date=2021-02-17|website=NPR|language=en}}</ref> In 2018, Facebook devoted $62,500 dollars to create a space for politicians to learn ways in which they can use digital rhetoric in Facebook to increase the impact of their campaigns.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Kreiss|first=Daniel|last2=Mcgregor|first2=Shannon C.|date=3 April 2018|title=Technology Firms Shape Political Communication: The Work of Microsoft, Facebook, Twitter, and Google With Campaigns During the 2016 U.S. Presidential Cycle|journal=Political Communication|volume=35|issue=2|pages=155–177|doi=10.1080/10584609.2017.1364814|s2cid=148690057}}</ref> Steir conducted a study to analyze the different types of rhetoric that took place in social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter; during the 2013 election campaign for the German [[Bundestag]], he found that the types of information that politicians share on both platforms varied — Facebook was found to be the preferred medium for campaign rhetoric, while Twitter was mostly utilized for rhetoric regarding political debates, [[infrastructure]] discussions, and [[law]] and order.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Stier|first=Sebastian|last2=Bleier|first2=Arnim|last3=Lietz|first3=Haiko|last4=Strohmaier|first4=Markus|date=2 January 2018|title=Election Campaigning on Social Media: Politicians, Audiences, and the Mediation of Political Communication on Facebook and Twitter|journal=Political Communication|volume=35|issue=1|pages=50–74|arxiv=1801.08825|doi=10.1080/10584609.2017.1334728|s2cid=2666049}}</ref> |
|||
Eyman gives background information on ancient rhetoric going all the way back to Aristotle. including illustrations of both conventional and modern rhetoric. Beginning with ancient Greece and the medieval eras, there is a shift to more modern methods and instances. He explains three expression modes: Ethos, Logos, and Pathos.<ref name="Eyman-2015" /> The term "digital" also refers to the physical production of texts, whether they are produced in print or electronically. In rhetorical studies, text can be seen as the medium for persuasive discourse or arguments; however, this tradition is primarily associated with printed texts, with less regard to 'Electric rhetoric', 'computational rhetoric', and 'technorhetoric'.<ref name="Eyman-2015" /> |
|||
[[Digital media]] has increasingly dominated the political sphere, especially with social media. [[Facebook]], [[Twitter]], and [[Instagram]] have become a significant part of the political engagement process with regard to elections, campaigns, or elected officials trying to connect with their [[Electoral district|constituencies]].<ref>{{Cite web|last=Clement|first=J.|date=2020|title=Topic: Social media and politics in the United States|url=https://www.statista.com/topics/3723/social-media-and-politics-in-the-united-states/|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181203201401/https://www.statista.com/topics/3723/social-media-and-politics-in-the-united-states/|archive-date=2018-12-03|access-date=2021-02-17|website=Statista|language=en}}</ref> Social media globalizes communication – especially that of political nature – fostering discussions and connecting communities as it reaches a significant number of people.<ref name=":03">{{Cite journal|last=Hall|first=Wendy|last2=Tinati|first2=Ramine|last3=Jennings|first3=Will|date=January 2018|title=From Brexit to Trump: Social Media's Role in Democracy|journal=Computer|volume=51|issue=1|pages=18–27|doi=10.1109/mc.2018.1151005|s2cid=28984103}}</ref> Amidst all of these outlets, Twitter is the form of social media primarily used by candidates running for public office, elected [[official]]s, and [[Government agency|government agencies]].<ref name=":03" /> |
|||
Eyman explores how traditional concepts, in rhetoric such as Ethos, Logos, and Pathos<ref name="Eyman-2015" /> have been modernized to remain relevant today. He clarifies that these age-old methods of persuasion still hold significance but have evolved to be applied now. For instance, establishing credibility or Ethos is no longer solely dependent upon the speaker's character. It now encompasses elements of presence such, as maintaining a reputation, a substantial following, and producing valuable content. When creating points using logic (Logos) incorporating elements such, as charts or videos can aid in clarifying intricate concepts for the audience's comprehension level to increase significantly. To enhance connections (Pathos) integrating visuals along, with sound and video components can intensify the impact of messages by adding a personal and profound touch to them. |
|||
Members of the [[United States Congress]] use Twitter and other forms of social media to connect with their constituencies. Members use social media to convey their stances on important issues and bills they have sponsored or have positions on. They use it to post about events they are hosting and the work they do in Congress. This includes meetings with constituents in Washington and back in their districts. According to former [[United States House of Representatives|Representative]] [[George Miller (California politician)|George Miller]], Twitter is a mechanism for him to answer questions from people in his district.<ref name=":22">{{Cite journal|last=Peterson|first=Rolfe Daus|date=1 December 2012|title=To tweet or not to tweet: Exploring the determinants of early adoption of Twitter by House members in the 111th Congress|journal=The Social Science Journal|volume=49|issue=4|pages=430–438|doi=10.1016/j.soscij.2012.07.002|s2cid=144000649}}</ref> Conversely, Representative [[John Culberson]] said he uses Twitter to assist people in engaging themselves in their government.<ref name=":22" /> Many of these sites provide features for people to connect with their elected officials. For example, on Facebook the "Town Hall" feature connects users with their [[Federal government of the United States|federal]] and [[State governments of the United States|state]] officials. According to [[Pew Research Center|PEW Research center]], 20% of people who use social media have taken advantage of the fact that they can connect very easily with their officials via a simple "like" or "follow".<ref name=":32">{{Cite web|last=Rainie, Lee|last2=Smith, Aaron|last3=Schlozman, Kay Lehman|last4=Brady, Henry|last5=Verba, Sidney|date=October 2012|title=Social Media and Political Engagement|url=http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media/Files/Reports/2012/PIP_SocialMediaAndPoliticalEngagement_PDF.pdf|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180508141432/http://www.pewinternet.org/files/old-media/Files/Reports/2012/PIP_SocialMediaAndPoliticalEngagement_PDF.pdf|archive-date=2018-05-08|access-date=2018-04-26|website=PEW Research Center}}</ref> |
|||
Eyman also mentions the shift, in dynamics brought about by platforms where persuasion becomes a process between speakers and audiences, unlike the traditional one-way communication in rhetoric. <ref name="Eyman-2015" /> The ability of audiences to actively engage by commenting and sharing enables them to influence and steer conversations in spaces. It's a shift that illustrates how a simple post, on media has the potential to spark extensive discussions and interactions as it resonates with a wider audience. In today's paced communication landscape communicators need to be prepared for interactions and varied responses, from their audience impacting the effectiveness of their message. |
|||
For candidates, social media brings [[publicity]] and enables them to communicate effectively to the voters,<ref name=":22" /> providing them with a platform to highlight their ideas and curate what they would like voters to see.<ref name=":4" /> According to the PEW research center, 35% of users of social media have taken advantage of sites like Facebook in getting out to vote, making it a valuable tool for candidates.<ref name=":6">{{Cite web|date=19 October 2012|title=Social Media and Political Engagement|url=http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/10/19/social-media-and-political-engagement/}}</ref> In the 2012 reelection campaign for incumbent U.S. President Barack Obama, the campaign used over 15 different social media methods to reach out to a broader audience.<ref name=":4" /> As the prominence of social media has increased, candidates have found it increasingly appealing to take advantage of the political benefits of its platforms. In the mayoral elections for [[Bacău|Bacau]], Romania, only 3/10 candidates used Facebook in 2012. In 2016, all of the candidates engaged in the use of social media and Facebook.<ref name=":22" /> |
|||
Moreover, Eyman discusses the issues surrounding communication strategies. New digital technologies allow tailored messages to target audiences by imposing algorithms determining content visibility. This gives rise, to concerns relating to data privacy, and openness. For example, the use of algorithms to hand picked user content may slightly shape their viewpoints without their awareness. Eyman emphasizes the importance of handling this form of "persuasion" due to its significant impact on public viewpoint or belief. |
|||
Social media also provides candidates with [[insight]] into predicting the outcome of votes, which are more accurate than normal [[Opinion poll|poll]]ing methods.<ref name=":6" /> Social media is a tool for campaigns as it provides an analysis as to the [[political climate]], as well as the levels of engagement.<ref name=":6" /> |
|||
Overall Eyman believes that digital communicators should be careful with these tools and use them ethically. He argues that rhetoric in the digital world isn’t just about persuading; it’s also about understanding the impact of these methods and respecting the audience’s trust and privacy.<ref name="Eyman-2015" /> This balanced approach encourages effective yet ethical communication. |
|||
For potential voters, social media is a way to get information. According to the PEW research center, 44% of the surveyed voting population used social media as a way to get information about the [[2016 United States presidential election]].<ref name=":7">{{Cite web|last1=Matsa|first1=Katerina Eva|last2=Lu|first2=Kristine|title=10 facts about the changing digital news landscape|url=https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/09/14/facts-about-the-changing-digital-news-landscape/}}</ref> This was significantly more than print newspapers at the local and national level. Furthermore, 24% of those surveyed claimed that they directly got information about the election at the national level from the two candidates; [[Donald Trump]] and [[Hillary Clinton]].<ref name=":7" /> |
|||
=== |
=== Narrative Rhetoric === |
||
[[Digital storytelling]] is another development over that has grown with the advancement of technology. While most of these have appeared in the context of fictional works, nonfiction, rhetorical work have also taken on elements of narrative theory in a digital setting. Nonfiction "Interactive Digital Narratives" use strategies usually utilized in the service of fictional storytelling as way of conveying information or trying to convince others of a certain position or argument. <ref name=":32">{{Cite journal |last1=Basaraba |first1=Nicole |last2=Arnds |first2=Peter |last3=Edmond |first3=Jennifer |last4=Conlan |first4=Owen |date=2021 |title=New Media Ecology and Theoretical Foundations for Nonfiction Digital Narrative Creative Practice |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/809285 |journal=Narrative |volume=29 |issue=3 |pages=374–395 |doi=10.1353/nar.2021.0017 |issn=1538-974X}}</ref> |
|||
Online harassment has steadily been on the rise since the rise of social media. As platforms meant for communicating, such as Twitter, have increased, so has the a digital rhetoric that includes an abundance of bullying.<ref>{{Cite web |last=January 2021 |first=John Corpuz 27 |title=Best chat apps for 2021 |url=https://www.tomsguide.com/best-picks/best-chat-apps |access-date=2021-03-03 |website=Tom's Guide |language=en}}</ref> Analysis linked cyberbullying-specific behaviors, including perpetration and victimization, to a number of detrimental psychosocial outcomes. The trend of people posting about the characters and their lifestyles reinforces the iconography of stereotypes (such as "hillbillies"), which is successful because of the way in which the rhetoric of difference is a naturalized component of the ethnic and racial identity.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Massey |first=Carissa |date=Spring 2018 |title=The rhetoric of the real: stereotypes of rural youth in American reality television and stock photography |journal=Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education}}</ref> These issues led the first Cyberbullying Prevention campaign, STOMP Out Bullying, to launch itself in 2005. Like the abundance of campaigns that would form in the next fifteen years, it focuses on creating cyberbullying awareness and reducing and preventing bullying.<ref>{{Cite web |title=STOMP Out Bullying History |url=https://www.stompoutbullying.org/our-history |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=www.stompoutbullying.org}}</ref> |
|||
Practical examples of IDNs being applied to works of rhetoric include interactive documentaries, documentaries which the user engages with on some engages with on a level more than simply observing it, and [[Serious game|serious games]], video games made with goals of nonrecreational education and training. The interactive nature of these communications means that the rhetoric of the narrative is being constantly reshaped and reinterpreted, meaning that there are many digital narratives go on without any true ending.<ref name=":32" /> |
|||
The challenge with social media has increased since the rise of 'cancel culture', which aims to end the career of the culprit through any means possible, mainly the boycott of their works.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Romano |first=Aja |date=2019-12-30 |title=Why we can't stop fighting about cancel culture |url=https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/30/20879720/what-is-cancel-culture-explained-history-debate |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=Vox |language=en}}</ref> There is a limited number of characters to convey the message, (ex: Twitter's 280 character limit)<ref>{{Cite web |title=Counting characters |url=https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/counting-characters |access-date=2021-03-03 |website=developer.twitter.com |language=en}}</ref> so messages in digital rhetoric tends to be underexplained, allowing stereotypes to flourish. Erika Sparby theorized that the ability to be anonymous and use [[pseudonym]]s or [[Avatar (computing)|avatars]] on social media gives users more confidence to address either someone or something in a negative light.<ref name="Sparby">{{Cite journal |last=Sparby |first=Erika M. |date=September 2017 |title=Digital Social Media and Aggression: Memetic Rhetoric in 4chan's Collective Identity |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=45 |pages=85–97 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2017.06.006}}</ref> |
|||
=== Prolepsis === |
|||
More recently, techniques utilizing machine learning and artificial intelligence have started to become popular in synthesizing fake, realistic videos involving people who are not actually in the videos themselves. These kinds of videos, referred to as "deepfakes" by a user in the popular chatting forum Reddit, can be made by easily obtainable and simple software, inciting concerns that people may use the software to blackmail or bully people online.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Smith|first=Hannah E.|last2=JD|date=2021-10-04|title=Deepfakes: Technology’s Dark Side|url=https://www.northcarolinadivorcelawyersblog.com/deepfakes-technologys-dark-side/|access-date=2022-02-16|website=North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog|language=en-US}}</ref> There have already been multiple incidents of this kind of harassment being used to bully people, one notable one involving a mother who used deepfake software to frame a few of her daughter's classmates at school by producing fake videos of them in pornographic videos.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Hinduja|first=Sameer|date=2021-03-16|title=Deepfakes and Cyberbullying|url=http://cyberbullying.org/deepfakes|access-date=2022-02-16|website=Cyberbullying Research Center|language=en-US}}</ref> Even more concerning is that deepfake videos are very difficult to detect using technology, and are so far only detectable using the human eye to spot irregularities in movement of the people in the videos.<ref>{{Cite web|date=2021-06-08|title=Deep Fakes and Social Media: A Q&A With Alex Cohen|url=https://digital.gov/2021/06/08/deep-fakes-and-social-media-a-qa-with-alex-cohen/|access-date=2022-02-16|website=Digital.gov|language=en-US}}</ref> |
|||
[[Prolepsis (rhetoric)|Prolepsis]] refers to the methods by which someone anticipates possible responses and arguments to a message. In digital communication, this exists in the form of social media proleptic cues, where one user issues a social media post makes a claim about the future or attempts to influence actions towards what the future should become. Other users who respond to these posts, in the form of comments or other validating/invalidating reactions, do so based on their own views on the predictions made. These responses serve as feedback for the original user, and as guiding tools for those responding to gauge and adapt to their own predictions.<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal |date=2024-04-03 |title=Współczesna prolepsis w retoryce cyfrowej: role i funkcje wskazówek proleptycznych {{!}} Res Rhetorica |url=https://resrhetorica.com/index.php/RR/article/view/757 |journal=Res Rhetorica |volume=11 |issue=1 |pages=138–154 |language=pl |doi=10.29107/rr2024.1.10 |doi-access=free |last1=Landowska |first1=Alina |last2=Rocci |first2=Andrea |last3=Koszowy |first3=Marcin }}</ref> |
|||
The nature of these statements makes it so that there is a possibility that anyone can inspire conversation or calls to action over a certain topic, even if they are ill-informed on the subject. Instances such as these can often lead to the spread of misinformation and disinformation online. The misuse of prolepsis in a digital sphere often occurs through false citations of authority, appeals to cultural and societal fears, and the employment of slippery slope arguments.<ref name=":1" /> |
|||
=== Misinformation and disinformation === |
|||
While digital rhetoric can often be used to persuade, in some cases, it is used to spread false and inaccurate information. The proliferation of illegitimate information over the internet has given rise to the term [[misinformation]], which is defined false claims that may or may not be intended to mislead others. This is not to be confused with [[disinformation]], which is illegitimate or inaccurate information that is spread with the intent to mislead others. Both misinformation and disinformation have had detrimental impacts on the knowledge, perceptions, and, in some cases, actions of many susceptible individuals. Scientific facts, such as the damaging environmental impacts of [[global warming]], now come into question on a daily basis. Social media specifically has greatly impacted the spreading of false information.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Bloomfield|first=Emma Frances|last2=Tillery|first2=Denise|date=2019-01-02|title=The Circulation of Climate Change Denial Online: Rhetorical and Networking Strategies on Facebook|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2018.1527378|journal=Environmental Communication|volume=13|issue=1|pages=23–34|doi=10.1080/17524032.2018.1527378|issn=1752-4032}}</ref> Accounts such as The Watts Up With That and Global Warming Policy Forum on Facebook have gained a following through their frequent denial of [[climate change]]. These accounts use hyperlinks and cited sources to disguise their false claims as legitimate.<ref name=":15">{{Cite journal |last=Bloomfield |first=Emma Frances |last2=Tillery |first2=Denise |date=2 January 2019 |title=The Circulation of Climate Change Denial Online: Rhetorical and Networking Strategies on Facebook |url=https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&context=comm_fac_articles |journal=Environmental Communication |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=23–34 |doi=10.1080/17524032.2018.1527378 |s2cid=149955425}}</ref> The sources used, however, often come in the form of blog posts and editorials from [[Far-right politics|far-right]] personalities.<ref name=":15" /> |
|||
== Social issues == |
|||
Social media has contributed to the proliferation of misinformation/disinformation because of its viral and largely unfiltered nature. Everyday users have the power to join together and perpetuate a narrative that could be entirely false. The effects of misinformation were on display during the United States' [[2020 United States presidential election|2020 presidential election]], where a record 100 million mail-in-ballots were cast in the early voting period.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Miao |first=Hannah |date=2020-11-04 |title=2020 election sees record high turnout with at least 159.8 million votes projected |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/04/2020-election-sees-record-high-turnout-with-at-least-159point8-million-votes-projected.html |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=CNBC |language=en}}</ref> Starting as early as April 2020, then-President [[Donald Trump|Trump]] tweeted about the dangers of widespread mail [[Electoral fraud|voting fraud]]<ref name=":19">{{Cite web |last=Alexandra Hutzler On 2/10/21 at 3:30 PM EST |date=2021-02-10 |title=Trump started tweeting about election fraud in April 2020, eight months before Capitol riot |url=https://www.newsweek.com/trump-started-tweeting-about-election-fraud-april-2020-eight-months-before-capitol-riot-1568365 |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=Newsweek |language=en}}</ref> even though studies have shown that mail voting fraud is rare and the dangers are negligible.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Farley |first=Robert |date=2020-04-10 |title=Trump's Latest Voter Fraud Misinformation |url=https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/trumps-latest-voter-fraud-misinformation/ |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=FactCheck.org |language=en-US}}</ref> Even after losing the presidential election to [[Joe Biden]], Trump continued to tweet about rigged elections, [[voter fraud]], and other proven falsehoods.<ref name=":19" /> On January 6, 2021, [[Congress]] was set to certify the results of the 2020 election. During an organized rally of Trump supporters in D.C. protesting the election results based on Trump's claims of fraud, an assembly of his supporters quickly turned violent, as a mob stormed the Capitol with the intent to overturn election results.<ref name=":20">{{Cite web|last=Subramanian|first=Courtney|title=A minute-by-minute timeline of Trump's day as the Capitol siege unfolded on Jan. 6|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/02/11/trump-impeachment-trial-timeline-trump-actions-during-capitol-riot/6720727002/|access-date=2021-02-18|website=USA TODAY|language=en-US}}</ref> The insurrection, which killed five people,<ref>{{Cite news |last=Healy |first=Jack |date=11 January 2021 |title=These Are the 5 People Who Died in the Capitol Riot |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/us/who-died-in-capitol-building-attack.html}}</ref> was the culmination of Trump's long thread of disinformation on social media. Trump was permanently suspended from [[Twitter]] two days later because his involvement in the insurrection violated Twitter's terms and conditions regarding the "glorification of violence".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump |url=https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html |access-date=2021-02-19 |website=blog.twitter.com |language=en-us}}</ref> Alongside being suspend from other major social media sites such as [[Facebook]] and [[YouTube]],<ref>{{Cite news |last=Denham |first=Hannah |title=These are the platforms that have banned Trump and his allies |work=Washington Post |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/11/trump-banned-social-media/}}</ref> Trump was impeached by the House of Representatives because of his incitement of the [[2021 storming of the United States Capitol|insurrection]]. |
|||
===Access=== |
|||
Referred to as the [[digital divide]], issues of [[Economic inequality|economic]] access and user-level access are recurring issues in digital rhetoric.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Lohr |first=Steve |date=December 4, 2018 |title=Digital Divide Is Wider Than We Think, Study Says |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/04/technology/digital-divide-us-fcc-microsoft.html |url-access=subscription}}</ref> These issues show up most prevalently at the intersection of [[computers and writing]], though the digital divide impacts a multitude of online forums, user bases, and communities. A lack of access can refer to inequality in obtaining information, means of communication, and opportunities. For many that teach digital rhetoric in schools and universities, student access to technologies at home and in school is an operative concern.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Reynolds |first1=Thomas J. |last2=Lewis |first2=Charles R. |date=January 1997 |title=The changing topography of computer access for composition students |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=14 |issue=2 |pages=269–278 |doi=10.1016/S8755-4615(97)90027-X}}</ref> There is some debate about whether [[mobile device]]s like smartphones make technology access more equitable.<ref>{{Cite book |title=Going Wireless: A Critical Exploration of Wireless and Mobile Technologies for Composition Teachers and Researchers |publisher=Hampton Press |year=2009 |editor-last=Hea, Amy C.K. |location=Cresskill, N.J. |pages=15–33}}</ref> In addition, the socioeconomic divide that is created due to accessibility is a major factor of digital rhetoric. For instance, [[Linda Darling-Hammond]], an [https://www.nih.gov/ NIH] researcher and professor of education at [[Stanford University]], discusses the lack of educational resources that children of color in America face.<ref name="Smedley-2001">{{Cite book |last1=Smedley |first1=Brian D. |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK223640/ |title=Inequality in Teaching and Schooling: How Opportunity Is Rationed to Students of Color in America |last2=Stith |first2=Adrienne Y. |last3=Colburn |first3=Lois |last4=Evans |first4=Clyde H. |last5=Medicine (US) |first5=Institute of |date=2001 |publisher=National Academies Press (US) |language=en}}</ref> Further, [[Angela M. Haas]], author of "Wampum as Hypertext: An American Indian Intellectual Tradition of Multimedia Theory and Practice", describes access in a more theoretical way. Her text explains that through access one can connect a physical body with the digital space.<ref name="Wampum as Hypertext: An American In">{{Cite journal|last=Haas|first=Angela M.|date=2008|title=Wampum as Hypertext: An American Indian Intellectual Tradition of Multimedia Theory and Practice|journal=Studies in American Indian Literatures|volume=19|issue=4|pages=77–100|doi=10.1353/ail.2008.0005|s2cid=144801330}}</ref> |
|||
Another contributing factor is [[technology diffusion]], which refers to how the market for new technology changes over time, and how that influences technology use and production across society.<ref>{{Cite book|last1=Wattal|first1=Sunil|last2=Hong|first2=Yili|last3=Mandviwalla|first3=Munir|last4=Jain|first4=Abhijit|title=2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences |chapter=Technology Diffusion in the Society: Analyzing Digital Divide in the Context of Social Class |date=January 2011|chapter-url=https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/5718600|pages=1–10|doi=10.1109/HICSS.2011.398|isbn=978-1-4244-9618-1|s2cid=6222264}}</ref> Studies conducted by scholar Sunil Wattal conclude that technology diffusion mimics social class status. As such, technology diffusion varies from community to community, making it a much greater challenge to ensure access equity across classes. These examples preface the topic that access encompasses every aspect of one's life and must be perceived as such. If accessibility is not resolved at a foundational level, then social discrimination will be further perpetuated.<ref name="Smedley-2001" /> |
|||
In 2020, misleading rhetoric led to heightened public health concerns when false information regarding [[coronavirus|COVID-19]] spread rapidly. Some theorized that the deadly virus could be cured upon the ingestion of bleach, while others believed the disease to have been intentionally started by [[China]] in an attempt to take over the world.<ref name=":17">{{Cite journal |last=Nguyen |first=An |last2=Catalan-Matamoros |first2=Daniel |date=25 June 2020 |title=Digital Mis/Disinformation and Public Engagement with Health and Science Controversies: Fresh Perspectives from Covid-19 |journal=Media and Communication |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=323–328 |doi=10.17645/mac.v8i2.3352 |doi-access=free |s2cid=222228241}}</ref> Trump also supported taking [[Hydroxychloroquine]] to prevent the contraction of [[coronavirus|COVID-19]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hydroxychloroquine-not-effective-prevention-covid-19-world-health-organization-donald-trump/|title=Hydroxychloroquine, once touted by Trump, should not be used to prevent COVID-19, WHO experts say|website=www.cbsnews.com}}</ref> The [[World Health Organization|World Health Organization (WHO)]] has advised on numerous occasions that the drug has no signs of preventing the spread of the virus. Despite their illegitimate nature, these conspiracy theories spread as quickly as the virus itself. As a result, the [[World Health Organization|WHO]] declared the proliferation of misinformation regarding the virus an "[[infodemic]]".<ref name=":17" /> This label caused most social media sites to strengthen their policies relating to false information, but many misleading claims still slip through the cracks. |
|||
[[File:Paywall Example.svg|thumb|An example of a paywall from a news site]] |
|||
Another issue of access comes in the form of [[paywall]]s, which can be a major hindrance for education and reduce accessibility to many educational tools and materials. This practice can increase barriers to scholarship and limit information that is [[open access]] and has forced some universities to pay over $11 million annually for access to certain works.<ref name="Resnick-2019">{{Cite web |last=Resnick |first=Brian |date=June 3, 2019 |title=The war to free science |url=https://www.vox.com/the-highlight/2019/6/3/18271538/open-access-elsevier-california-sci-hub-academic-paywalls |access-date=February 17, 2021 |website=Vox |language=en}}</ref> Open access removes the barriers of access fees and the restrictions of copyright and licensing, allowing more equal access to works. Open access and digital rhetoric do not eliminate copyright, but they eliminate restrictions by giving authors the choice to maintain their right to copy and distribute their materials however they choose, or turn the rights over to a specific journal. Digital rhetoric involves works that are found online and open access is allowing more people to be able to reach these works.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Steinhart |first=Gail |title=LibGuides: Open Access Publishing: What is Open Access? |url=https://guides.library.cornell.edu/openaccess/home |access-date=February 17, 2021 |website=guides.library.cornell.edu |language=en}}</ref> |
|||
=== Politics === |
|||
The increased [[Digitization|digitalization]] of media has amplified the influence of digital rhetoric in politics, as it introduces a more direct relationship between politicians and citizens. Digital communication platforms and [[List of social networking websites|social networking sites]] allow citizens to share information and engage in debate with other people of similar or distinct political [[Ideology|ideologies]], which have been shown to influence and predict the political behavior of individuals outside the digital world.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Himelboim|first1=Itai|last2=Lariscy|first2=Ruthann Weaver|last3=Tinkham|first3=Spencer F.|last4=Sweetser|first4=Kaye D.|date=February 29, 2012|title=Social Media and Online Political Communication: The Role of Interpersonal Informational Trust and Openness|journal=Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media|volume=56|issue=1|pages=92–115|doi=10.1080/08838151.2011.648682|s2cid=144127370}}</ref> Some politicians have used digital rhetoric as a persuasive tool to communicate information to citizens. Reciprocally, digital rhetoric has enabled increasing political participation among citizens. Theoretical research on digital rhetoric in politics has attributed the increase of political participation to three models: the motivation model, the learning model, and the attitude model.<ref name="Jiang-2017" /> |
|||
* The ''motivation model'' proposes that digital rhetoric has decreased the opportunity costs of participating in politics since it makes information readily available to the people.<ref name="Jiang-2017" /> |
|||
* The ''learning model'' established the increase in political participation to the vast amount of political information available on the Internet which increases the inclusion of the citizens in the political process.<ref name="Jiang-2017" /> |
|||
* The ''attitude model'' extended from the previous two by suggesting that digital rhetoric has changed the perception of citizens towards politics, particularly by providing interactive tools that allow people to engage in the political process.<ref name="Jiang-2017">{{Cite journal|last=Jiang|first=Liang|date=October 2, 2017|title=Why context matters: the role of campaign context in the relationship between digital media use and political participation|journal=Australian Journal of Political Science|volume=52|issue=4|pages=580–598|doi=10.1080/10361146.2017.1373064|s2cid=158661419}}</ref> |
|||
=== Online harassment === |
|||
Online harassment has, over time, become an increasingly persistent issue, especially on social media.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Vogels |first=Emily A. |date=January 13, 2021 |title=The State of Online Harassment |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/01/13/the-state-of-online-harassment/ |access-date=November 10, 2023 |website=Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |title=Online Hate and Harassment: The American Experience 2023 |url=https://www.adl.org/resources/report/online-hate-and-harassment-american-experience-2023 |access-date=November 10, 2023 |website=ADL|date=2023 |language=en}}</ref> Analysis linked cyberbullying-specific behaviors, including perpetration and victimization, to a number of detrimental psychosocial outcomes. The trend of people posting about their characters and lifestyles reinforces stereotypes (such as "hillbillies"), an outcome based on the fact that the rhetoric of difference is a naturalized component of the ethnic and racial identity.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Massey |first=Carissa |date=Spring 2018 |title=The rhetoric of the real: stereotypes of rural youth in American reality television and stock photography |journal=Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education|volume=38|issue=3|pages= 365–376|doi=10.1080/01596306.2017.1306982}}</ref> Due to limits on the number of characters available to convey a message (for example, Twitter's 280-character limit),<ref>{{Cite web |title=Counting characters |url=https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/counting-characters |access-date=March 3, 2021 |website=Twitter Developer Platform|language=en}}</ref> messages in digital rhetoric tend to be scarcely explained, allowing stereotypes to flourish. Erika Sparby theorized that anonymity and use [[pseudonym]]s or [[Avatar (computing)|avatars]] on social media gives users more confidence to address someone or something negatively.<ref name="Sparby">{{Cite journal |last=Sparby |first=Erika M. |date=September 2017 |title=Digital Social Media and Aggression: Memetic Rhetoric in 4chan's Collective Identity |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=45 |pages=85–97 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2017.06.006}}</ref> |
|||
In 2005, these issues led to the launch of the first cyberbullying prevention campaign: STOMP Out Bullying. Like the abundance of campaigns that would form in the next fifteen years, it focuses on creating cyberbullying awareness and reducing and preventing bullying.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Tucker |first=Bradford |date=2015-10-23 |title=Anti-Bullying Organizations and Resources - Array BC |url=https://arraybc.com/anti-bullying-organizations-and-resources |access-date=2024-10-22 |website=Array Behavioral Care |language=en-US}}</ref> The challenge of bullying within social media has increased following the rise of "[[cancel culture]]", which aims to end the career of a culprit through any means possible, mainly the boycott of their works.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Romano |first=Aja |date=December 30, 2019 |title=Why we can't stop fighting about cancel culture |url=https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/30/20879720/what-is-cancel-culture-explained-history-debate |access-date=February 18, 2021 |website=Vox |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal |last=Norris |first=Pippa |date=February 2023 |title=Cancel Culture: Myth or Reality? |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00323217211037023 |journal=Political Studies |language=en |volume=71 |issue=1 |pages=145–174 |doi=10.1177/00323217211037023 |issn=0032-3217}}</ref> |
|||
More recently, techniques utilizing [[machine learning]] and [[artificial intelligence]] have become popular in synthesizing [[deepfake]]s: realistic but fake videos of people whose faces are swapped out with other people's faces. These kinds of videos can be created by easily obtainable and simple software, inciting concerns that people may use the software to blackmail or bully people online.<ref>{{Cite web|last1=Smith|first1=Hannah E.|last2=JD|date=October 4, 2021|title=Deepfakes: Technology's Dark Side|url=https://www.northcarolinadivorcelawyersblog.com/deepfakes-technologys-dark-side/|access-date=February 16, 2022|website=North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog|language=en-US}}</ref> A large quantity of images containing faces are required to create a deepfake. In addition, specific types of characteristics, such as different exposure and color levels, need to be consistent to make a realistic video. However, given the vast amounts of photos of people publicly available on the Internet from social media sites, there is concern about the extent to which people can use deepfakes as a bullying tactic. There have already been multiple incidents of this kind of harassment being used to bully people. One example involved a mother who used deepfake software to frame a few of her daughter's classmates at school by producing fake videos of them in pornographic videos.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Hinduja|first=Sameer|date=March 16, 2021|title=Deepfakes and Cyberbullying|url=http://cyberbullying.org/deepfakes|access-date=February 16, 2022|website=Cyberbullying Research Center|language=en-US}}</ref> Due to machine learning and artificial intelligence being relatively new subfields of computer science and mathematics, there has not been enough time for deepfake video detection technologies to mature, and so far are only detectable using the human eye to spot irregularities in movement of the people in the videos.<ref>{{Cite web|date=June 8, 2021|title=Deep Fakes and Social Media: A Q&A With Alex Cohen|url=https://digital.gov/2021/06/08/deep-fakes-and-social-media-a-qa-with-alex-cohen/|access-date=February 16, 2022|website=Digital.gov|language=en-US}}</ref> |
|||
=== Misinformation and disinformation === |
|||
While digital rhetoric can often be used to persuade, in some cases it is used to spread false and inaccurate information. The proliferation of illegitimate information over the Internet has given rise to the term ''[[misinformation]]'', which is defined as the spread of false claims that may or may not be intended to mislead others.<ref name=":8" /> This is not to be confused with ''[[disinformation]]'', which is illegitimate or inaccurate information that is spread with the intent to mislead others.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fallis |first=Don |date=December 2015 |title=What Is Disinformation? |url=https://muse.jhu.edu/article/579342 |journal=Library Trends |language=en |volume=63 |issue=3 |pages=401–426 |doi=10.1353/lib.2015.0014 |hdl=2142/89818 |issn=1559-0682|hdl-access=free }}</ref> Both misinformation and disinformation have consequences towards the knowledge, perceptions, and, in some cases, actions of individuals. Social media specifically has greatly impacted the spread of false information. Scientific facts, such as the damaging environmental impacts of [[climate change]], now come into question on a daily basis.<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal |last1=Bloomfield |first1=Emma Frances |last2=Tillery |first2=Denise |date=January 2, 2019 |title=The Circulation of Climate Change Denial Online: Rhetorical and Networking Strategies on Facebook |url=https://digitalscholarship.unlv.edu/comm_fac_articles/29 |journal=Environmental Communication |volume=13 |issue=1 |pages=23–34 |bibcode=2019Ecomm..13...23B |doi=10.1080/17524032.2018.1527378 |issn=1752-4032 |s2cid=149955425}}</ref> |
|||
[[File:Screenshot of suspended account realDonaldTrump on Twitter 2020-01-09.png|thumb|Donald Trump's Twitter account permanently suspended in January 2020.]] |
|||
Social media has contributed to the proliferation of misinformation/disinformation because of its viral and largely unfiltered nature. Everyday users have the power to join and perpetuate a narrative that could be entirely false. In recent years, the term "[[fake news]]"—used synonymously with misinformation—has been highly popularized and politicized in digital spaces.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Gelfert |first=Axel |date=2018 |title=Fake News: A Definition |url=https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/informallogic/1900-v1-n1-informallogic04379/1057034ar/abstract/ |journal=Informal Logic |language=en |volume=38 |issue=1 |pages=84–117 |doi=10.22329/il.v38i1.5068 |s2cid=55730612 |issn=0824-2577|doi-access=free }}</ref> |
|||
The effects of misinformation were further on display during the [[2020 United States presidential election]], where social media usage had an impact on [[United States Congress|Congress]].<ref>{{Cite web |last=Miao |first=Hannah |date=November 4, 2020 |title=2020 election sees record high turnout with at least 159.8 million votes projected |url=https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/04/2020-election-sees-record-high-turnout-with-at-least-159point8-million-votes-projected.html |access-date=February 18, 2021 |website=CNBC |language=en}}</ref> Starting as early as April 2020, then-President [[Donald Trump]] tweeted about the dangers of widespread mail [[Electoral fraud|voting fraud]]<ref name="Hutzler-2021">{{Cite web |first =Alexandra |last=Hutzler |date=February 10, 2021 |title=Trump started tweeting about election fraud in April 2020, eight months before Capitol riot |url=https://www.newsweek.com/trump-started-tweeting-about-election-fraud-april-2020-eight-months-before-capitol-riot-1568365 |access-date=February 18, 2021 |website=Newsweek |language=en}}</ref> though studies had shown that mail voting fraud is rare and the dangers are negligible.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Farley |first=Robert |date=April 10, 2020 |title=Trump's Latest Voter Fraud Misinformation |url=https://www.factcheck.org/2020/04/trumps-latest-voter-fraud-misinformation/ |access-date=February 18, 2021 |website=FactCheck.org |language=en-US}}</ref> After losing the election, Trump continued to use Twitter as his main platform to speak about rigged elections, mail-in voter fraud, and other proven falsehoods.<ref name="Hutzler-2021" /> On January 6, 2021, Congress was set to certify the results of the 2020 election whilst a rally of Trump supporters were protesting the election results based on Trump's claims of fraud. This assembly of his supporters quickly turned violent, as a mob [[2021 United States Capitol attack|stormed the Capitol]] with the intent to overturn election results.<ref name="Subramanian-2021">{{Cite web|last=Subramanian|first=Courtney|title=A minute-by-minute timeline of Trump's day as the Capitol siege unfolded on Jan. 6|url=https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/02/11/trump-impeachment-trial-timeline-trump-actions-during-capitol-riot/6720727002/|access-date=February 18, 2021|website=USA TODAY|language=en-US}}</ref> The insurrection led to the death of five people.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Healy |first=Jack |date=January 11, 2021 |title=These Are the 5 People Who Died in the Capitol Riot |work=The New York Times |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/11/us/who-died-in-capitol-building-attack.html}}</ref> Trump was permanently suspended from Twitter two days later because his involvement in the insurrection violated Twitter's terms and conditions regarding the "glorification of violence".<ref>{{Cite web |title=Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump |url=https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/company/2020/suspension.html |access-date=February 19, 2021 |website=blog.twitter.com |language=en-us}}</ref> He was also suspended from other major social media sites such as Facebook and [[YouTube]]. This incident started a heated debate about social media companies' abilities to limit free speech; ultimately, these companies are still private businesses who are allowed to determine their own [[terms and conditions]] as they see fit, which users must agree to in order to use these platforms in the first place.<ref>{{Cite news |last=Denham |first=Hannah |title=These are the platforms that have banned Trump and his allies |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2021/01/11/trump-banned-social-media/ |newspaper=Washington Post}}</ref> |
|||
===Legitimacy=== |
===Legitimacy=== |
||
There is controversy regarding the innovative nature of digital rhetoric. Arguments opposed to legitimizing web text are Platonically based, in that they reject the new form of [[Scholarly method|scholarship]] (web text) and praise the old form (print) in the same way that oral communication was originally favored over written communication.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Borgman, Christine |title=Scholarship in a Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet |publisher=MIT Press |year=2007 |location=Cambridge, MA |jstor=ctt5hhbk7|page=78|isbn = 9780262255783 |doi=10.7551/mitpress/7434.001.0001}}</ref> Originally some traditionalists did not regard online [[open access]] journals with the same legitimacy as print journals for this reason; however, digital arenas have become the primary place for disseminating academic information in many areas of scholarship.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Dunham, Gary |title=What are Trends in Scholarly Publishing? |url=http://www.asha.org/Academic/questions/Trends-Scholarly-Publishing/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120430053618/http://www.asha.org/Academic/questions/Trends-Scholarly-Publishing/ |archive-date=April 30, 2012}}</ref> Modern scholars struggle to "claim academic legitimacy" in these new media forms, as the tendency of pedagogy is to write about a subject rather than actively work in it.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ball |first=C |date=2004 |title=Show, not tell: The value of new media scholarship |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=403–425 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2004.08.001}}</ref> |
|||
[[File:Old book bindings.jpg|thumb|Old books]] |
|||
There is controversy regarding the innovative nature of digital rhetoric. Arguments opposed to legitimizing webtext are Platonically-based in that they reject the new form of [[Scholarly method|scholarship]]—web text, and praise the old form—print, in the same way that oral communication was originally favored over written communication.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Borgman, Christine |title=Scholarship in a Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet |publisher=MIT Press |year=2007 |location=Cambridge, MA |page=78}}</ref> Originally some traditionalists did not regard online [[Open access|open-access]] journals with the same legitimacy as print journals for this reason; however, digital arenas have become the primary place for disseminating academic information in many areas of scholarship.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Dunham, Gary |title=What are Trends in Scholarly Publishing? |url=http://www.asha.org/Academic/questions/Trends-Scholarly-Publishing/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120430053618/http://www.asha.org/Academic/questions/Trends-Scholarly-Publishing/ |archive-date=2012-04-30}}</ref> Modern scholars struggle to "claim academic legitimacy" in these new media forms, as the tendency of [[pedagogy]] is to write about a subject rather than actively work in it.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ball |first=C |date=2004 |title=Show, not tell: The value of new media scholarship |journal=Computers and Composition |volume=21 |issue=4 |pages=403–425 |doi=10.1016/j.compcom.2004.08.001}}</ref> Within the past decade, more scholarly texts have been openly accessible, which provides an innovative way for students to gain access to textual materials online for free, in the way that many [[Academic journal|scholarly journals]] like ''[[Kairos (journal)|Kairos]]'',<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/|title=Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy|website=kairos.technorhetoric.net}}</ref> ''Harlot of the Arts'',<ref>[http://harlotofthearts.org/index.php/harlot Harlot of the Arts]</ref> and ''Enculturation''<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.enculturation.net/|title=enculturation | A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Culture|website=www.enculturation.net}}</ref> are already available through open access. [[Coronavirus disease 2019|COVID-19 Coronavirus]] forced schools across the globe to switch to an "online only" approach. By March 25, 2020, all school systems in the [[United States]] closed indefinitely.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-07-02 |title=The Coronavirus Spring: The Historic Closing of U.S. Schools (A Timeline) |url=https://www.edweek.org/leadership/the-coronavirus-spring-the-historic-closing-of-u-s-schools-a-timeline/2020/07 |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=Education Week |language=en}}</ref> In search of a platform to host online learning, many schools incorporated popular video chat service [[Zoom Video Communications|Zoom]] as their method of providing socially distant instruction. In April 2020, Zoom was hosting over 300 million daily meetings, as opposed to 10 million in December 2019.<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-04-09 |title=Zoom Revenue and Usage Statistics (2020) |url=https://www.businessofapps.com/data/zoom-statistics/ |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=Business of Apps |language=en-US}}</ref> While some may view online learning as a drop in education quality,<ref>{{Cite web |last=Lauria |first=Sam |date=2020-09-19 |title=Zoom University is cheating students out of a proper education |url=https://www.sbstatesman.com/2020/09/19/zoom-university-is-cheating-students-out-of-a-proper-education/ |access-date=2021-02-18 |website=The Statesman |language=en-US}}</ref> the shift to online learning demonstrated the current state of accessibility to digital information while promoting the use of digital learning through Zoom meetings, [[YouTube]] videos, and broadcasting systems such as [[Open Broadcaster Software]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Subhi |first=M A |last2=Nurjanah |first2=N |last3=Kosasih |first3=U |last4=Rahman |first4=S A |date=October 2020 |title=Design of distance lectures in mathematics education with the utilization of the integration of Zoom and YouTube application |journal=Journal of Physics: Conference Series |volume=1663 |issue=1 |page=012058 |bibcode=2020JPhCS1663a2058S |doi=10.1088/1742-6596/1663/1/012058 |doi-access=free}}</ref> |
|||
Within the past decade, more scholarly texts have been openly accessible, which provides an innovative way for students to gain access to textual materials online for free, such as [[Academic journal|scholarly journals]] like ''[[Kairos (journal)|Kairos]]'',<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://kairos.technorhetoric.net/|title=Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy|website=kairos.technorhetoric.net}}</ref> ''Harlot of the Arts'',<ref>[http://harlotofthearts.org/index.php/harlot Harlot of the Arts]</ref> and ''Enculturation''.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.enculturation.net/|title=enculturation | A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Culture|website=www.enculturation.net}}</ref> |
|||
=== COVID-19 pandemic === |
|||
[[File:Video Conference Using Laptop.jpg|alt=A laptop is sitting on a desk. The screen is divided in half showing blurred images of two people video conferencing.|thumb|When shifting to online learning, many schools used video conference applications to continue teaching lessons.]] |
|||
The persistence of the global [[COVID-19 pandemic]] has changed both physical and digital spaces. The resulting isolation and economic shutdowns complicated existing issues and created a new set of globalized challenges as it "imposed" a change to the "[[psychosocial]] environment".<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Fegert |first1=Jörg M. |last2=Vitiello |first2=Benedetto |last3=Plener |first3=Paul L. |last4=Clemens |first4=Vera |date=May 12, 2020 |title=Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality |journal=Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health |volume=14 |issue=1 |pages=20 |doi=10.1186/s13034-020-00329-3 |issn=1753-2000 |pmc=7216870 |pmid=32419840 |doi-access=free }}</ref> The pandemic has forced the majority of individuals with Internet access to depend on technology in order to remain connected to the outside world, and on a larger scale, global economies have become reliant on transitioning business to digital platforms.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Ganichev |first1=N. A. |last2=Koshovets |first2=O. B. |date=February 19, 2021 |title=Forcing the Digital Economy: How will the Structure of Digital Markets Change as a Result of the COVID-19 Pandemic |journal=Studies on Russian Economic Development |language=en |volume=32 |issue=1 |pages=11–22 |doi=10.1134/S1075700721010056 |issn=1075-7007 |pmc=7893839 |pmid=33642845}}</ref> |
|||
Additionally, the pandemic forced schools across the globe to switch to an 'online only' approach. By March 25, 2020, all school systems in the [[United States]] closed indefinitely.<ref>{{Cite news |date=July 2, 2020 |title=The Coronavirus Spring: The Historic Closing of U.S. Schools (A Timeline) |language=en |website=Education Week |url=https://www.edweek.org/leadership/the-coronavirus-spring-the-historic-closing-of-u-s-schools-a-timeline/2020/07 |access-date=February 18, 2021}}</ref> In search of a platform to host online learning, many schools incorporated popular video chat service [[Zoom Video Communications|Zoom]] as their method of providing socially distant instruction. In April 2020, Zoom was hosting over 300 million daily meetings, as opposed to 10 million in December 2019.<ref>{{Cite web |date=April 9, 2020 |title=Zoom Revenue and Usage Statistics (2020) |url=https://www.businessofapps.com/data/zoom-statistics/ |access-date=February 18, 2021 |website=Business of Apps |language=en-US}}</ref> The shift to online learning demonstrated the current state of accessibility to digital information while promoting the use of digital learning through Zoom meetings, YouTube videos, and broadcasting systems such as [[Open Broadcaster Software]].<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Subhi |first1=M A |last2=Nurjanah |first2=N |last3=Kosasih |first3=U |last4=Rahman |first4=S A |date=October 2020 |title=Design of distance lectures in mathematics education with the use of the integration of Zoom and YouTube application |journal=Journal of Physics: Conference Series |volume=1663 |issue=1 |page=012058 |bibcode=2020JPhCS1663a2058S |doi=10.1088/1742-6596/1663/1/012058 |doi-access=free}}</ref> Still, it is questioned whether or not the switch to online learning has had detrimental impacts on students. In particular, it has been difficult to transition younger students to completely online models of learning, who often miss the social aspects of a school setting.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Adnan |first1=Muhammad |last2=Anwar |first2=Kainat |date=2020 |title=Online Learning amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Students' Perspectives. |url=https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed606496 |journal=Online Submission |language=en |volume=2 |issue=1 |pages=45–51}}</ref> |
|||
The pandemic has also contributed to creating misleading rhetoric in online spaces. Heightened public health concerns combined with the accessibility of social media led to the rapid spread of both misinformation and disinformation regarding COVID-19. Some people online theorized that the deadly virus could be cured by the ingestion of [[bleach]], while others believed the disease to have been intentionally started by [[China]] in an attempt to take over the world.<ref name="Nguyen-2020">{{Cite journal |last1=Nguyen |first1=An |last2=Catalan-Matamoros |first2=Daniel |date=June 25, 2020 |title=Digital Mis/Disinformation and Public Engagement with Health and Science Controversies: Fresh Perspectives from Covid-19 |journal=Media and Communication |volume=8 |issue=2 |pages=323–328 |doi=10.17645/mac.v8i2.3352 |doi-access=free |s2cid=222228241|hdl=10016/30664 |hdl-access=free }}</ref> Trump also supported taking [[hydroxychloroquine]] to prevent the contraction of COVID-19.<ref>{{Cite web |first=Sophie|last=Lewis|title=Hydroxychloroquine, once touted by Trump, should not be used to prevent COVID-19, WHO experts say |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/hydroxychloroquine-not-effective-prevention-covid-19-world-health-organization-donald-trump/ |website=CBS News|date=March 2, 2021 }}</ref> The [[World Health Organization]] (WHO) had advised on numerous occasions that the drug has no signs of preventing the spread of the virus. Despite their illegitimate nature, these conspiracy theories have spread rapidly in digital spaces. As a result, WHO declared the proliferation of misinformation regarding the virus an "[[infodemic]]". In response, many social media sites to strengthen their policies relating to false information, but many misleading claims still find their way online.<ref name="Nguyen-2020" /> |
|||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
* [[Artificial intelligence rhetoric]] |
|||
* [[Composition studies]] |
* [[Composition studies]] |
||
* [[Computer-mediated communication]] |
* [[Computer-mediated communication]] |
||
Line 191: | Line 302: | ||
* [[Media studies]] |
* [[Media studies]] |
||
* [[Technological convergence]] |
* [[Technological convergence]] |
||
* [[Feminist technoscience]] |
|||
* [[Technofeminism]] |
|||
== References == |
== References == |
||
{{Reflist}} |
{{Reflist}} |
||
{{ |
{{Clear}} |
||
{{Communication studies}} |
{{Communication studies}} |
||
{{Computer-mediated communication}} |
{{Computer-mediated communication}} |
Latest revision as of 19:30, 12 December 2024
This article may be too technical for most readers to understand.(April 2022) |
Digital rhetoric is communication that exists in the digital sphere. It can be expressed in many different forms, including text, images, videos, and software.[2] Due to the increasingly mediated nature of contemporary society, distinctions between digital and non-digital environments are less clear.[3] This has expanded the scope of digital rhetoric to account for the increased fluidity with which humans interact with technology.[4]
The field of digital rhetoric is not yet fully established. It draws theory and practices from the tradition of rhetoric as both an analytical tool and a production guide. As a whole, it can be categorized as a meta-discipline.[2]
Due to evolving study, digital rhetoric has held various meanings to different scholars over time.[2] It can take on a variety of meanings based on what is being analyzed, depending on the concept, forms or objects of study, or rhetorical approach. Digital rhetoric can also be analyzed through the lenses of different social movements.[5]
Digital rhetoric lacks a strict definition amongst scholars. The discussion and debate toward reaching a definition accounts for much of the writing, study, and teaching of the topic. [6] One of the most straightforward definitions for "digital rhetoric" is that it is the application of rhetorical theory to digital communication.[2]: 13
Definition
[edit]Part of a series on |
Rhetoric |
---|
Precursors to Digital Rhetoric, and Rhetoric in the early Computer Age
[edit]Rhetoric has developed alongside many technological developments, with digital mediums being amongst the most recent and transformative. There are many ancient and historical examples of "machine's to think with." Early examples of devices being used for the purpose of guiding thought include Martianus Capella's 9th century glossed collections of prose, philosophy and other writings, and the biblical concordances developed by monks between the 12th and 13th century.[7] Some argue that types of man-made artwork and codes, such as ancient Egyptian hieroglyphics, were some of the first forms of digital rhetoric. [2]
In 1917, C.I Scofield created an annotated version of the King James Bible. This version of the bible would indicate passages that related to one another throughout both the Old and New Testaments, guiding the reader's interpretation of the work. These "connected topic concordances" are similar to "key-in context concordances" used on modern computers. [8]
By the 1960s, early computers had become more prominent in many environments, and began seeing application outside of math and science. In 1964, Harvard's Allan B. Ellis published an analysis of how computers could be used to better understand literary works, through having text from The Adventures of Huckleberry plugged into punched cards and having the computer analyze the titular character.[9] Between the mid-60's and early 70's, there were several experiments to investigate the potential for computers in the grading of academic papers. These computers were programmed to approximate the way that teachers generally approached the grading process, and judge the content in its quality of vocabulary, composition, and approach to the content. [10][11]
Evolving definition of 'digital rhetoric'
[edit]The following subsections detail the evolving definition of 'digital rhetoric' as a term since its creation in 1989.[6]
Early definitions (1989–2015)
[edit]The term digital rhetoric was coined by rhetorician Richard A. Lanham in a 1989 lecture[6] and was first published in his 1993 essay collection, The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts.[12] Lanham avoided coming to a firm definition, instead aiming to connect digital communication to examples from traditional communication, discussing the relationship between postmodern theory, digital arts, and classical rhetoric. Digital rhetoric theory is primarily based in traditional rhetoric and shares many of its methods and characteristics, including it's status as a meta-discipline. Lanham's work referred to many works of Hypertext theory. Hypertext theory is a similar, but less broad concept to digital rhetoric, which studied the consequences of computer users interacting with hypertext links. [2] Much of the writing on the theory focused on how the meaning that hypertext links gave to words and enforces a relationship between users and the particular words, and how this could be implemented in rhetorical and educational settings. [13]
In 1997, Calgary University professor Doug Brent expanded on the concept of hypertext theory, approaching the topic from a rhetorical framework, when past studies depended more on literary analysis. This presented hypertext as a kind of "new rhetoric".[2][14] The same year, Bowling Green University scholar Gary Heba united studies of hypertext and visual rhetoric into the concept of "HyperRhetoric", a multimedia communication experience that could not be replicated outside of an internet setting. Heba stated that as the online landscape and the perspectives of users change, HyperRhetoric must also adapt and evolve. This fluidity remains a characteristic of digital rhetoric.[15][2]
The late 1990s and early 2000s represented a greater shift towards rhetoric in digital communication study, and how "persuasion" functions in an online setting.[2] In 2005, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute scholar James P. Zappen expanded the conversation beyond persuasion and into digital rhetoric's capacity for creative expression in exploring the behavior of individuals and groups in online settings.[16]
Recent scholarship (2015–present)
[edit]In his 2015 book Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice, Douglas Eyman defined digital rhetoric as "the application of rhetorical theory (as analytic method or heuristic for production) to digital texts and performances".[2]: 44
By this definition, digital rhetoric can be applied as an analytic method for digital content and be a basis for future study, offering rhetorical questions as research guidelines.[2]: 12, 44 Eyman categorized the emerging field of digital rhetoric as interdisciplinary in nature, related to fields like: digital literacy, visual rhetoric, new media, human–computer interaction, critical code studies, and a variety of many more.[2]: 44
In 2018, rhetorician Angela Haas offered her own definition of digital rhetoric, defining it as "the digital negotiation of information – and its historical, social, economic, and political contexts and influences – to affect change".[17] Haas emphasized that digital rhetoric does not solely apply to text-based items—it can also apply to image-based or system-based items. In this way, any form of communication that occurs in the digital sphere can be counted as digital rhetoric. [18]
In 2023, scholars Zoltan P. Majdik and S. Scott Graham considered not only the rhetorical landscape of artificial intelligence but what it might mean to use artificial intelligence as a resource for rhetorical scholarship. The authors posit a dual perspective on AI—first, as a rapidly developing technology that will have profound effects on human communication, and second, as an object of study for communication scholars who might want to consider using AI in the same way they might consider using any other resource or technology.[19]
In 2024, Penn State rhetorician Stuart A. Selber defined digital rhetoric studies through a selection of guiding questions:
- How does traditional rhetoric inform the study of digital communication as a rhetorical medium?
- When traditional rhetoric fails to inform scholars in a situation exclusive to digital formats, are new concepts required or can traditional concepts be reconsidered?
- If new ideas are needed, what will be their source? How will they be examples of rhetoric? [20]
Selber stated that a concept is rhetorical if it helps in analyzing how speakers use the circumstances of society and their message's medium to influence the opinions of others.[20]
Other definitions
[edit]While most research represents a traditionally Western view of rhetoric, Arthur Smith of UCLA explains that the ancient rhetoric of many cultures, such as African rhetoric, existed independent of Western influence, and developed in ways that reflect the values and functions of those societies.[21] Today, rhetoric encompasses all forms of discourse that serve any given purpose within specific contexts, while also being shaped by those contexts.[22]
Some scholars interpret this rhetorical discourse with greater focus on the digital aspect. University of Texas's Casey Boyle, Rutgers University-Camden's James Brown Jr., and University of Virginia's Steph Ceraso claim that "the digital" is no longer a single strategy that can be used to enhance traditional rhetoric, but an "ambient condition" that encompass all parts of life.[23] As technology has become more ubiquitous, the lines between traditional and digital rhetoric have blurred. Technology and rhetoric can influence and transform each other. [4]
Concepts
[edit]Circulation
[edit]Circulation theorizes the ways that text and discourse moves through time and space, and any kind of media can be circulated. A new form of communication is composed, created, and distributed through digital technologies. Media scholar Henry Jenkins explains there is a shift from distribution to circulation, which signals a move toward an increasingly participatory model of culture in which people shape, share, re-frame, and remix media content in ways not previously possible within the traditional rhetorical formats like print. [24] The various concepts of circulation include:
- Collaboration – Digital rhetoric has taken on a very collaborative nature through the use of digital platforms. Sites such as YouTube and Wikipedia involve opportunity for "new forms of collaborative production".[25] Digital platforms have created opportunities for more people to enact and create, as digital platforms open doors for collaborative communication that can occur synchronously, asynchronously, over far distances, and across multiple disciplines and professions.[25][26]
- Crowdsourcing – Daren Brabham describes the concept of crowdsourcing as the use of modern technology to collaborate, create, and solve problems collectively.[27] Ethical concerns have been raised while engaging in crowdsourcing, specifically in situations that lack a clear set of compensation practices or protections in place to secure information.[27]
- Delivery – Digital technologies allow rhetoric to be delivered in new "electronic forms of discourse".[28] Acts and modes of communication can be represented digitally by combining multiple different forms of media into a composite helping to create an easy user experience.[29] The growing popularity of the Internet meme is an example of combining, circulating, and delivering media in a collaborative effort through file sharing. Although memes are sent through microtransactions they often have a macro-level, large-scale impact.[30] Another form of rhetorical delivery are encyclopedias, which traditionally were printed and based primarily on text and images. However, modern technological developments now enable online encyclopedias to integrate sound, animation, video, algorithmic search functions, and high-level productions into a cohesive multimedia experience as part of their new forms of digital rhetoric.[29]
Critical literacy
[edit]Critical literacy is the ability to identify bias in media, under the assumption that all media is biased.[31] It can also be defined as a communicative tool to lead to social change and promote social action by using a critical lens when approaching social-political topics.[32] In order to identify bias amid the immense volume of information imposed on digital audiences, individuals need to develop the ability to process and critically examine content—on both familiar and unfamiliar topics.[33]
In an essay on critical literacy in writing, the University of Melbourne stated the importance of developing these skills through reading and questioning what texts are trying to accomplish. Ultimately, this allows an idea's interpretation to come from the reader, not the writer.[34]
For example, a study conducted at the Indiana University in Bloomington used algorithms to assess 14 million Twitter messages containing statements about the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign and election. They found that from May 2016 to March 2017, social bots were responsible for causing approximately 389,000 unsupported political claims to go viral.[35]
Interactivity
[edit]Interactivity in digital rhetoric can be defined as the ways in which readers connect to and communicate with digital texts. This includes activity between the audience, the audience and the message being sent, the audience and the medium, and the communication between separate mediums. Readers have the ability to like, share, repost, comment on, and remix online content. These interactions allow writers, scholars, and content creators to get a better idea of how their work is affecting their audience.[36]
Some ways communicators promote interactivity include the following:
- Mind sharing is the methods and components of communication that collective intelligence is gathered and transferred. It is based in the sharing of emotional, knowledge-based, and goal-based sharing. The human ability of language is the primary example of mind-sharing. Mind sharing functions as a method of concept sharing, presenting generally agreed upon meanings for words and phrases, and concept activation sharing, where these specific meanings prompt reactions when communicated.[37]
- Multimodality is a form of communication that uses multiple methods (or modes) to inform audiences of an idea. It can involve a mix of written text, pictures, audio, or videos. These communications offer a wealth of information that could not be accessed from traditional methods, but are disorganized and can be difficult to reach conclusions from. All writing and all communication is, theoretically, multimodal.[38]
- Remix is a method of digital rhetoric that manipulates and transforms an original work to convey a new message. The use of remix can help the creator make an argument by connecting seemingly unrelated ideas into a convincing whole. As modern technology develops, self-publication sites such as YouTube, SoundCloud, and WordPress have stimulated remix culture, allowing for easier creation and dissemination of reworked content. Unlike appropriation, which is the use and potential recontextualization of existing material without significant modification, 'remix' is defined by Ridolfo and Devoss as "the process of taking old pieces of text, images, sounds, and video and stitching them together to form a new product".[39] A popular example of remixing is the creation and sharing of memes. [40]
Procedural rhetoric
[edit]Procedural rhetoric is rhetoric formed through processes or practices.[41] Some scholars view video games as one of these processes through which rhetoric can be formed.[41][42] For example, ludology scholar and game designer Gonzalo Frasca poses that the simulation-nature of computers and video games offers a "natural medium for modeling reality and fiction".[42] Therefore, according to Frasca, video games can take on a new form of digital rhetoric in which reality is mimicked but also created for the future.[42] Similarly, scholar Ian Bogost argues that video games can serve as models for how 'real-world' cultural and social systems operate.[41] They also argue for the necessity of literacy in playing video games as this allows players to challenge (and ultimately accept or reject) the rhetorical standpoints of these games.[41]
Rhetorical velocity
[edit]Rhetorical velocity is the concept of authors writing in a way in which they are able to predict how their work might be recomposed. Scholars Jim Ridolfo and Danielle DeVoss first coined this idea in 2009 when they described rhetorical velocity as "a conscious rhetorical concern for distance, travel, speed, and time, pertaining specifically to theorizing instances of strategic appropriation by a third party".[43] Author Sean Morey agrees with this definition of rhetorical velocity and describes it as a creator anticipating the response their work with generate.[44]
For example, digital rhetoric is often labelled using tags, which are keywords used to help readers find, view, and share relevant texts and information. These tags can be found on blog posts, news articles, scholarly journals, and more. Tagging allows writers, scholars, and content creators to organize their work and make it more accessible and understandable to readers.[45]
Appropriation carries both positive and negative connotations for rhetorical velocity. In some ways, appropriation is a tool that can be used for the reapplication of outdated ideas to make them better. In other ways, appropriation is seen as a threat to creative and cultural identities. Social media receives the bulk of this scrutiny due to the lack of education of its users. Most "contributors are often unaware of what they are contributing",[46] which perpetuates the negative connotation. Scholars in digital rhetoric—such as Jessica Reyman, Amy Hea, and Johndan Johnson-Eilola—explore this topic and its effects on society. Scholars have also connected the role of rhetorical velocity to visual rhetoric through a study of environmental image circulation, demonstrating that "while environmental image circulation is often viewed as an ambivalent, or even performative, practice for environmental citizenship, it is also an important space for cultivating participatory culture online."[47]
Visual rhetoric
[edit]Digital rhetoric often invokes visual rhetoric due to digital rhetoric's reliance on visuals.[2] Charles Hill states that images "do not necessarily have to portray an object, or even a class of objects, that exists or ever did exist" to remain impactful.[48] However, the use of imagery for rhetorical purposes in digital spaces cannot always be easily differentiated from "traditional" physical visual mediums. As such, approaching this concept requires a careful analysis of the viewer, situational, and visual contexts involved.[49] A prominent part of this concept is its intersection of perspective with technology, as computers allow users to create a curated view for online space. Examples of the Internet relying and reshaping visual rhetoric include Social media platforms like Instagram,[50] and incredibly realistic deepfakes.[51]
Digitally-produced art is a significant way users express themselves on technological platforms; the unique intersection of text and image has given rise to new rhetorical language through the modification of slang and in-group language.[52] In particular, the culturally-specific and nuanced use of pop culture references through Internet memes have gradually built upon themselves to create complex, highly flexible, and Internet-specific (or even platform-specific) dialects of speech.[53] [40]Through popularity-based natural selection, edits of commonly accepted meme templates fuel the cycle of rhetorical creation.[40]
Other forms of digital-visual rhetoric include remixing and parodying. In the chapter "Digital Rhetoric Practice" in Digital Rhetoric Theory, Method, Practice, Douglas Eyman speaks about the growth of digital rhetoric in a digital world. Digital rhetoric has become distinguished from its other rhetoric counterparts, as it is an easily accessible path for people to spread their messages through the reuse of already existing content and putting their own twist on it.[2] This is widespread because of meme cultures and online video platforms.[54]
Digital-visual rhetoric does not only rely on intentional manipulation. Sometimes, meanings can arise from unexpected places and otherwise-overlooked features. For example, emojis can carry heavy consequences by permeating daily communication. Varying skin tones provided (or excluded) by developers for emojis may perpetuate preexisting racial biases of colorism.[55] Even otherwise-innocuous images of peaches and eggplants are regular stand-ins for genital regions; they can be both harmless modes of flirtation and tools for sexually harassing women online when sent en masse.[55]
The concept of the avatar also illustrates visual rhetoric's deeply personal impact, particularly when using Miami University scholar James E. Porter's definition of the avatar as an extended "virtual body".[56] While scholars such as Beth Kolko hoped for an equitable online world free of physical barriers, social issues still persist in digital realms, such as gender discrimination and racism.[57] For example, Victoria Woolums found that, in the video game World of Warcraft, an avatar's gender identity instigated bias from other characters even though an avatar's gender identity may not be physically accurate to its user.[58] These relationships are further complicated by the varying degrees of anonymity characterizing inter-user communications in online spaces. While the possibility of true privacy can be facilitated by impersonal avatars, they are still personal manifestations of a user's self in the context of digital spaces.[59] Furthermore, the tools available to curate and express these are platform-dependent and ripe for both liberation and exploitation. In circumstances such as Gamergate or debates regarding influencer culture and their portrayals of impossible and computer-edited body image, self-presentation is heavily mediated by accessibility to and mastery of online avatars.[59]
Forms and objects of study
[edit]Infrastructure
[edit]Information infrastructure is the underlying organization of public information on the Internet, which impacts how and what the public accesses online.[60] Databases and search engines are information infrastructure as they play a large role in access to and dissemination of information. Information Infrastructure often consists of algorithms and metadata standards, which curate the information presented to the public.[61]
Software
[edit]Coding and software engineering are not often recognized as rhetorical writing practices, but in the process of writing code, people instruct machines to "make arguments and judgments and address audiences both mechanic and human".[62] Technologies themselves can be viewed as rhetorical genres, simultaneously guiding users' experiences and communication with each other and being shaped and improved through humans use.[63] Choices baked into software that are invisible to users impact the user experience and reveal information about the priorities of the software engineers.[64] For instance, while Facebook allows users to choose over 50 gender identities to display on their public profile, an investigation into the social media's software revealed that users are filtered into the male-female gender binary within the database for targeted advertising purposes.[65] For another example, pieces of software called BitTorrent trackers facilitate the massive distribution of information on Wikipedia. Software facilitates the collective rhetorical action of this encyclopedia.[63]
The field of software studies encourages the investigation into and recognition of software's impacts on people and culture.[62]
People
[edit]Online communities
[edit]Online communities are groups of people with common interests that interact and engage over the Internet. Many online communities are found within social networking sites, online forums, and chat rooms, such as Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and 4chan, where members can share and discuss information and inquiries. These online spaces often establish their own rules, norms, and culture, and in some cases, users will adopt community-specific terminology or phrases.[66]
Scholars have noted that online communities have especially gained prominence among users like e-patients and victim-survivors of abuse.[67] Within online health and support groups respectively, members have been able to find others who share similar experiences, receive advice and emotional support, and record their own narrative.[68]
Online communities support community but in some cases can support polarization. Communities face issues with online harassment in the form of trolling, cyberbullying, and hate speech.[69] According to the Pew Research Center, 41% of Americans have experienced some form of online harassment with 75% of these experiences occurring over social media.[70] Another area of concern is the influence of algorithms on delineating the online communities a user comes in contact with. Personalizing algorithms can tailor a user's experience to their analytically determined preference, which creates a "filter bubble". The user loses agency in content accessibility and information dissemination when these bubbles are created.[71][72] The loss of agency can lead to polarization, but recent research indicates that individual level polarization is rare.[73] Most polarization is due to the influx of users with extreme views that can encourage users to move towards partisan fringes from "gateway communities".[73]
Social media
[edit]Social media makes human connection formal, manageable, and profitable to social media companies.[74] The technology that promotes this human connection is not human, but automated. As people use social media and form their experiences on the platforms to meet their interests, the technology also affects how the users interact with each other and the world.[74]
Social media also allows for the weaving of "offline and online communities into integrated movements".[75] Users' actions, such as liking, commenting, sending, retweeting, or saving a post, contribute to the algorithmic customization of their personalized content.[76] Social media's reach is determined by these algorithms.[76] Social media also offers various image altering tools that can impact image perception—making the platform less human and more automated.[77]
Digital activism
[edit]Digital activism serves an agenda-setting function as it can influence mainstream media and news outlets. Hashtags, which curate posts with similar themes and ideas into a central location on a digital platform, aid in bringing exposure to social and political issues. The subsequent discussions these hashtags create put pressure on private institutions and governments to address these issues, as can be seen with movements like #CripTheVote,[78] #BringBackOurGirls,[75] or #MeToo.[79] Many recent social movements have originated on Twitter, as Twitter Topic Networks provide a framework for online community organizing. Digital activism allows people who may have not had a voice previously an equal chance to be heard.[75]
Though some believe that digital activism has a universal function, it takes different forms and philosophies in different parts of the world. In some parts of the world, it takes on a "techno-political" approach, basing communications off of broad political, social, and economic trends, relying on technology prevalent in the free culture movement. Others take a "techno-pragmatic" philosophy, focused more on the specific political and social goal, often at a more personal level. Some areas remain "techno-fragmented," where there are few intersections between traditional and digital forms of activism. [80]
Influencers and content creators
[edit]As social media is increasingly becoming more available, the influencer/content creator position has also become recognized as a profession. With such a large and rapid consumer presence on social media, it creates both a helpful and overwhelming source of consumer information for advertisers. There is substantial potential to identify "market mavens" on social media due to fandom culture and the nature of influencer/content creator followings. Social media has opened up business opportunities for corporations to employ influencer marketing, where they can more easily find suitable influencers to advertise their products to their viewers.[81]
Online learning
[edit]Although online learning existed previously, its prevalence increased during the COVID-19 pandemic.[82] Online learning platforms are known as e-learning management systems (ELMS). They allow both students and teachers access to a shared, digital space which includes classroom resources, assignments, discussions, and social networking through direct messaging and email.[83] Although socialization is a component of ELMS, not all students utilize these resources; rather, they focus on the lecturer as the primary resource of knowledge.[84] The long-term effects of emergency online learning, which many turned to during the height of the pandemic, is ongoing; however, one study concluded that students' "motivation, self-efficacy, and cognitive engagement decreased after the transition".[85]
Interactive media
[edit]Video games
[edit]The procedural and interactive nature of video games leads them to be rich examples of procedural rhetoric.[86] This rhetoric can range from games designed to bolster children's learning to challenging one's assumptions of their world.[87] An educational video game developed for students at the University of Texas at Austin, titled Rhetorical Peaks, was made with the goal of examining rhetoric's procedural nature and to capture the constantly changing contexts of rhetoric.[88][86] The open-ended nature of the game, as well as the developer's intent on playing the game within a classroom setting, encouraged collaboration among students and the development of individual interpretations of the game's plot based on vague clues; this ultimately helped them to realize that there must be a willingness to change between lines of thought and to work both within and beyond accepted limits in understanding rhetoric.[clarification needed][86]
In mainstream gaming, each game has its own set of language which help shape the way information is transferred between players in their community.[89][88] Within the realm of online gaming—which includes games such as Call of Duty or League of Legends—players can communicate with each other and create their own rhetoric within the established world of the game, which allows players to influence and be influenced by the other gamers around them.[90]
The game Detroit: Become Human has another way of encouraging digital rhetoric within the gaming community. This decision-based video game gives the player the power to create their own story that deals with gender, race, and sexuality. Its futuristic message of a human-to-machine relationship prompts discussion due to the difficult moral decisions made while playing. At the end, there are surveys to take to see other players' opinions about certain decisions around the world.[91]
Podcasting
[edit]Podcasting is another form of digital rhetoric. Podcasting can augment the ancient progymnasmata in ways that illuminate the relationship between rhetoric and digital sound.[92] Podcasting can teach rhetorical practices through soundwriting.[93] And a rhetorical pedagogy oriented around narrative nonfiction podcasting may—if it can overcome some key limitations—hold the potential to spark social change.[94]
Mobile applications
[edit]Mobile applications (apps) are computer programs designed specifically for mobile devices, such as phones or tablets. Mobile apps cater to a wide range of audiences and needs, and allow for a "cultural hybridity of habit" which allows anyone to stay connected with anyone, anywhere.[95] Due to this, there is always access to changing cultures and lifestyles, since there are so many different apps available to research or publish work.[95] Furthermore, mobile apps allow individual users to manage aspects of their lives, while the apps themselves are able to change and upgrade socially.[96]
Information access on mobile devices poses challenges to user interfaces, notably due to the small screen and keys (or lack thereof), in comparison to larger counterparts such as laptops and PCs. However, it also has the advantage of heightening physical interactivity with touch, and presents experiences with multiple senses in this way. Likewise, mobile technologies offer location-based affordances for layering different types of information in communication design.[97] With these varying factors, mobile applications need trustworthy, reliable, and helpful UI design and UX design to create successful user experience.[98]
Immersive media
[edit]Emerging immersive technologies such as virtual reality remove the visual presence of devices and mimic emotional experiences.[99] User immersion into virtual reality includes simulated real-life communication; virtual reality provides the illusion of being somewhere the body physically is not, which contributes to widespread communication that reaches the point of telepresence and telexistence.[99] Digital museums, serious games, and interactive documentaries often utilize virtual reality and augmented reality elements to relate users to historical settings and events, to teach them about the topic or to inform them of a specific point of view. While these are useful in conveying information in an immersive setting with an accessible narrative, those narratives can simplify the context to a point where some of the nuance is lost. Museums that employ immersive exhibits often find that tourist engage with these for the purpose of leisure, rather than wanting to gain thorough learning experience.[100]
Critical approaches
[edit]Technofeminism
[edit]Digital rhetoric gives a platform to technofeminism, a concept that brings together the intersections of gender, capitalism, and technology.[101] Technofeminism advocates for equality for women in technology-heavy fields and researches the relationship between women and their devices. Intersectionality is a term coined by Kimberlé Crenshaw that recognizes the societal injustices based on our identities.[101] It is often challenging for women to navigate finding and interacting in digital spaces without harassment or gender biases.[102] There is an importance of digital activism for unrepresented communities, such as gender non-conforming and transgender people of all races, disabled people, and people of color.[102]
Technofeminism and intersectionality are still not very prevalent when developing new technologies and research. In the journal Computers and Composition, only five articles explicitly use the term intersectionality or technofeminism.[101] Online feminism also faces challenges of reactive sexism and misogyny. In one example, of the over 600 million internet users in India, 63% users are male, with 39% being female. This contrast in users often makes these heavily male digital spaces hostile to women. While some feminist social media movements are able to inspire policy change or shine a light on issues facing women, others have been subject to severe backlashes with few achievements to show as a result, even if the movement reaches a wide audience.[103]
Rhetorical feminism
[edit]Cheryl Glenn, in her article "The Language of Rhetorical Feminism, Anchored in Hope", explores the study of rhetoric, feminism, and hope, introducing a theoretical framework she calls "rhetorical feminism". This framework began as a platform for recognizing and valuing the traditionally overlooked rhetorical practices and powers of marginalized groups called "Others". Glenn's approach is meant to challenge biased attitudes and actions, and promote a what some consider an inclusive and tolerant societal discourse.[104]
In connection to digital rhetoric, the article underscores the power of digital platforms in their ability to either facilitate or obstruct democratic dialogues. Glenn acknowledges the influence of rhetoric across traditional and digital domains to challenge systems seen as unjust and engage individuals in democratic practices. Glenn's stance within the article aligns with the broader narrative of digital rhetoric, which often explores the dynamics of power, representation, and access to digital platforms in molding public discourse.[104]
Digital cultural rhetoric
[edit]As the Internet has expanded, digital media or rhetoric has come to be used to represent or identify a culture. Scholars have studied how digital rhetoric is affected by one's personal factors, such as race, religion, and sexuality. Due to these factors, people utilize different tools and absorb information differently.[2]
Digital culture has created the need for specialized communities on the web. Computer-mediated communities such as Reddit can give a voice to these specialized communities. One can experience and converse with other like-minded people on the web via comment sections and shared online migration.[105] The creation of digital cultural rhetoric has allowed for the use of online slang that other communities may not be aware of. Online communities that explore digital cultural rhetoric allow users to discover their social identity and confront stereotypes that they face (or faced).[106]
Embodiment
[edit]Embodiment is the idea that every person has a unique relationship with technology based on their unique set of identities. Studying the relationship between bodies and technology is one way that digital rhetoricians are able to promote equal access and opportunity within the digital sphere.[17] Since technology is considered to be an extension of the real world, users are also shaped by the experiences they have in digital spaces. The artificial interactions that occur in online environments allow users to exist in a way that is additive to their human experience.[107]
Pedagogy
[edit]With digital rhetoric becoming increasingly present, pedagogical approaches have been proposed by scholars to teach digital rhetoric in the classroom. Courses in digital rhetoric study the intersectionality between users and digital material, as well as how different backgrounds such as age, ethnicity, and gender can affect these interactions.[108] Studies of digital pedagogy function as insight into the advantages and disadvantages of implementing digital technology in to education settings, and the consequences of incorrect use.[109] Examples include electronic libraries and databases,[110] as well as "thinking tools" used by students for the purposes of transcription, editing, and tagging of works.[111] Digital pedagogy is a wider scope of study than online pedagogy, focusing not only on the internet, but also on the devices and mediums of that convey the online communication.[109]
Higher education
[edit]Several scholars teach digital rhetoric courses at universities in the US, although their approaches vary considerably.[2] Jeff Grabill,[112] a scholar with a background in English, education, and technology, encourages his contemporaries to find a bridge between the scholarly field of digital rhetoric and its implementation. Another rhetorician, Cheryl Ball, specializes in areas that consist of multimodal composition and editing practices, digital media scholarship, digital publishing, and university writing pedagogy. Ball teaches students to write and compose multimodal texts by analyzing rhetorical options and choosing the most appropriate genres, technologies, media, and modes for a particular situation.[113][114] Multimodality also influenced Understanding Rhetoric: A Graphic Guide to Writing by Elizabeth Losh (et al.), which emphasizes engaging the comic form of literacy.[115] A similar approach also inspired Melanie Gagich to alter the curriculum of her first-year English course completely, aiming to redefine digital projects as rigorous academic assignments and teach her students necessary audience analysis skills.[116] Such a design ultimately allowed students in Gagich's classroom to develop their creativity and confidence as writers.[116]
In another approach, Douglas Eyman recommends a course in web authoring and design that provides undergraduates more practical instruction in the production and rhetorical understanding of digital texts; specifically, it provides opportunities for students to learn fundamentals of web writing and design conventions, rules, and procedures.[2]: 171 Similarly, Collin Bjork argues that "integrating digital rhetoric with usability testing can help researchers cultivate a more complex understanding of how students, instructors, and interfaces interact in OWI [online writing instruction]".[117]
Other scholars focus more on the relationship between digital rhetoric and social impact. Scholars Lori Beth De Hertogh (et al.) and Angela Haas have published materials discussing intersectionality and digital rhetoric, arguing that the two are inseparable and classes covering digital rhetoric must also explore intersectionality.[17][101] Iowa State's Lauren Malone has also analyzed the relationship between identity and teaching digital rhetoric through research on online engagement of queer and transgender people of color.[118] From this research, Malone created a series of steps for digital rhetoric instructors to take in order to foster inclusivity within their classrooms.[118] In her work, scholar Melanie Kill has introduced digital rhetoric to college-aged students, arguing for the importance of editing Wikipedia and capitalizing on their privilege of education and access to materials.[119] Similar to De Hertogh (et al.) and Haas, Kill believes an education in digital rhetoric serves all students, as it facilitates positive social change.[119]
K–12
[edit]Many educational systems are framed so that students actively participate in technological systems as designers of digital rhetoric, not passive users.[1] There are three core goals students have identified for their coursework: building their own digital space, learning all aspects of digital rhetoric (including the theory, technology, and uses), and applying it in their own lives. The ecological system generated by the interactions of students with classmates, digital media, and other individuals is the basis of "interconnected" rhetorical processes and shared digital work.[1]
Video games are one avenue through which students learn to design the rhetoric and code underlying their technological systems. Video game use has evolved rapidly since the 1980s, and current video games have been incorporated into education.[120] Scholar Ian Bogost suggests that video games can be utilized in a multitude of subjects to serve as models for studying the non-digital world. Specifically, he notes that video games could be used as an "entry point" into computer science for students who may not have been interested in the field. Games and game technology enhance learning by operating at the "outer and growing edge of a player's competence".[121] Games challenge students at levels that cause frustration but preserve motivation to solve the challenge at this edge.[121]
Bogost also notes that video games can be taught as rhetorical and expressive in nature, allowing children to model their experiences through programming. When dissected, the ethics and rhetoric in video games' computational systems is exposed.[122] Analysis of video games as an interactive medium reveals the underlying rhetoric through the performative activity of the player.[120] Recognition of procedural rhetoric through course studies reflects how these mediums can augment politics, advertisement, and information.[120] To help address the rhetoric in video game code, scholar Collin Bjork makes a series of recommendations for integrating digital rhetoric with usability testing in online writing instruction.[117]
Some scholars have also identified specific practices for digital rhetoric instruction in pre-collegiate classrooms. As Douglas Eyman points out, students require agency when learning digital rhetoric, meaning instructors designing lessons must allow students to interact with the technology directly and enact change on the design.[1] This is consistent with discoveries by other professors, who claim one of the primary goals of students in a digital rhetoric classroom is to create space for themselves, connections with peers, and deeply understand its significance.[108] These interpersonal connections reflect a "thick correlation between digitalization and empowering pedagogy".[123]
Pre-K
[edit]The United States Government's Office of Educational Technology has emphasized four guiding principles when using technology with early learners:
- When used appropriately, technology can be a tool for learning.
- The use of technology should allow for increased access to learning opportunities for all children.
- Technology can be used to strengthen relationships between children and their families, early educators, and friends.
- Technology is most effective when early learners are interacting with adults and peers. Adults can also supervise children online for said effectiveness.[124]
Despite these four pillars, most studies conclude that learning technology for children under the age of two is not beneficial. At most, technology can be used to promote relationship development for these children; for instance, by using video chat software to connect with loved ones at a distance.[124]
Digital rhetoric as a field of study
[edit]In 2009, rhetorician Elizabeth Losh[125] offered this four-part definition of digital rhetoric in her book Virtualpolitik:[126]
- The conventions of new digital genres that are used for everyday discourse, as well as for special occasions, in average people's lives.
- Public rhetoric, often in the form of political messages from government institutions, that is represented or recorded through digital technology and disseminated via electronically distributed networks.
- The emerging scholarly discipline concerned with the rhetorical interpretation of computer-generated media as objects of study.
- Mathematical theories of communication from the field of information science, many of which attempt to quantify the amount of uncertainty in a given linguistic exchange or the likely paths through which messages travel.[127]
Losh's definition demonstrates that digital rhetoric is a field that relies on different methods to study various types of information, such as code, text, visuals, videos, and so on.[125]
Douglas Eyman suggests that classical theories can be mapped onto digital media but a larger academic focus should be placed on the "extension of rhetorical theory".[128] Careers in developing and analyzing the rhetoric in code form a prominent field of study. Computers and Composition, a journal established in 1985, focuses on computer communication and has considered the use of "rhetoric as their conceptual framework" and the digital rhetoric in software development.[128]
Studies on how digital rhetoric implicates various topics are ongoing and encompass many fields. In his book, Digital Griots: African American Rhetoric in a Multimedia Age, Adam J. Banks states that modern day storytellers, like stand-up comics and spoken word poets, give African American rhetoric a flexible approach that is still true to tradition.[129] While digital rhetoric can be used to facilitate traditions, select cultures face several practical application issues. Radhika Gajjala, professor at Bowling Green State University, writes that South Asian cyber feminists face issues with regard to building their web presence.[130]
Research ethics
[edit]Writing and rhetoric scholars Heidi McKee and James E. Porter discuss the complicated issue of Internet users posting information publicly on the Internet but expecting the post to be semi-private. This appears contradictory, but socially the Internet is composed of millions of social identities, social groups, social norms, and social influence.[131] These social aspects of the Internet are important to consider when studying digital topics because the digital and non-digital are getting harder to distinguish from one another.[132]
A study conducted by Rösner and Krämer in 2016 showed that participants' identities would reflect the norms of these online social groups. Similar to how social groups are seen in an in-person setting, posts on forums, comment sections, and social media are like having a conversation with friends in a public setting. Typically, researchers would not use a conversation heard in public, but an online conversation is not only available to its social group.[133] James Zappen, in his article "Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory", adds that many of these groups foster a creative and collaborative nature to share information to the public.[134]
McKee and Porter suggest the use of a casuistic heuristic approach to doing digital research. This method of study is based on focusing on the moral principle of 'do no harm' to the audience and generating needed formulas or diagrams to help guide the researcher when gathering data. It is noted that this method does not provide all the answers. Instead, it is a starting point for the scholar to approach the digital world. More scholars have added their own take to an ethical approach for digital data. Many have a case-based approach with add-on consent from participants (if possible), anonymity to participants, and consideration of what harm could come to the groups being studied.[132][135]
Eyman gives background information on ancient rhetoric going all the way back to Aristotle. including illustrations of both conventional and modern rhetoric. Beginning with ancient Greece and the medieval eras, there is a shift to more modern methods and instances. He explains three expression modes: Ethos, Logos, and Pathos.[1] The term "digital" also refers to the physical production of texts, whether they are produced in print or electronically. In rhetorical studies, text can be seen as the medium for persuasive discourse or arguments; however, this tradition is primarily associated with printed texts, with less regard to 'Electric rhetoric', 'computational rhetoric', and 'technorhetoric'.[1]
Eyman explores how traditional concepts, in rhetoric such as Ethos, Logos, and Pathos[1] have been modernized to remain relevant today. He clarifies that these age-old methods of persuasion still hold significance but have evolved to be applied now. For instance, establishing credibility or Ethos is no longer solely dependent upon the speaker's character. It now encompasses elements of presence such, as maintaining a reputation, a substantial following, and producing valuable content. When creating points using logic (Logos) incorporating elements such, as charts or videos can aid in clarifying intricate concepts for the audience's comprehension level to increase significantly. To enhance connections (Pathos) integrating visuals along, with sound and video components can intensify the impact of messages by adding a personal and profound touch to them.
Eyman also mentions the shift, in dynamics brought about by platforms where persuasion becomes a process between speakers and audiences, unlike the traditional one-way communication in rhetoric. [1] The ability of audiences to actively engage by commenting and sharing enables them to influence and steer conversations in spaces. It's a shift that illustrates how a simple post, on media has the potential to spark extensive discussions and interactions as it resonates with a wider audience. In today's paced communication landscape communicators need to be prepared for interactions and varied responses, from their audience impacting the effectiveness of their message.
Moreover, Eyman discusses the issues surrounding communication strategies. New digital technologies allow tailored messages to target audiences by imposing algorithms determining content visibility. This gives rise, to concerns relating to data privacy, and openness. For example, the use of algorithms to hand picked user content may slightly shape their viewpoints without their awareness. Eyman emphasizes the importance of handling this form of "persuasion" due to its significant impact on public viewpoint or belief.
Overall Eyman believes that digital communicators should be careful with these tools and use them ethically. He argues that rhetoric in the digital world isn’t just about persuading; it’s also about understanding the impact of these methods and respecting the audience’s trust and privacy.[1] This balanced approach encourages effective yet ethical communication.
Narrative Rhetoric
[edit]Digital storytelling is another development over that has grown with the advancement of technology. While most of these have appeared in the context of fictional works, nonfiction, rhetorical work have also taken on elements of narrative theory in a digital setting. Nonfiction "Interactive Digital Narratives" use strategies usually utilized in the service of fictional storytelling as way of conveying information or trying to convince others of a certain position or argument. [136]
Practical examples of IDNs being applied to works of rhetoric include interactive documentaries, documentaries which the user engages with on some engages with on a level more than simply observing it, and serious games, video games made with goals of nonrecreational education and training. The interactive nature of these communications means that the rhetoric of the narrative is being constantly reshaped and reinterpreted, meaning that there are many digital narratives go on without any true ending.[136]
Prolepsis
[edit]Prolepsis refers to the methods by which someone anticipates possible responses and arguments to a message. In digital communication, this exists in the form of social media proleptic cues, where one user issues a social media post makes a claim about the future or attempts to influence actions towards what the future should become. Other users who respond to these posts, in the form of comments or other validating/invalidating reactions, do so based on their own views on the predictions made. These responses serve as feedback for the original user, and as guiding tools for those responding to gauge and adapt to their own predictions.[137]
The nature of these statements makes it so that there is a possibility that anyone can inspire conversation or calls to action over a certain topic, even if they are ill-informed on the subject. Instances such as these can often lead to the spread of misinformation and disinformation online. The misuse of prolepsis in a digital sphere often occurs through false citations of authority, appeals to cultural and societal fears, and the employment of slippery slope arguments.[137]
Social issues
[edit]Access
[edit]Referred to as the digital divide, issues of economic access and user-level access are recurring issues in digital rhetoric.[138] These issues show up most prevalently at the intersection of computers and writing, though the digital divide impacts a multitude of online forums, user bases, and communities. A lack of access can refer to inequality in obtaining information, means of communication, and opportunities. For many that teach digital rhetoric in schools and universities, student access to technologies at home and in school is an operative concern.[139] There is some debate about whether mobile devices like smartphones make technology access more equitable.[140] In addition, the socioeconomic divide that is created due to accessibility is a major factor of digital rhetoric. For instance, Linda Darling-Hammond, an NIH researcher and professor of education at Stanford University, discusses the lack of educational resources that children of color in America face.[141] Further, Angela M. Haas, author of "Wampum as Hypertext: An American Indian Intellectual Tradition of Multimedia Theory and Practice", describes access in a more theoretical way. Her text explains that through access one can connect a physical body with the digital space.[142]
Another contributing factor is technology diffusion, which refers to how the market for new technology changes over time, and how that influences technology use and production across society.[143] Studies conducted by scholar Sunil Wattal conclude that technology diffusion mimics social class status. As such, technology diffusion varies from community to community, making it a much greater challenge to ensure access equity across classes. These examples preface the topic that access encompasses every aspect of one's life and must be perceived as such. If accessibility is not resolved at a foundational level, then social discrimination will be further perpetuated.[141]
Another issue of access comes in the form of paywalls, which can be a major hindrance for education and reduce accessibility to many educational tools and materials. This practice can increase barriers to scholarship and limit information that is open access and has forced some universities to pay over $11 million annually for access to certain works.[144] Open access removes the barriers of access fees and the restrictions of copyright and licensing, allowing more equal access to works. Open access and digital rhetoric do not eliminate copyright, but they eliminate restrictions by giving authors the choice to maintain their right to copy and distribute their materials however they choose, or turn the rights over to a specific journal. Digital rhetoric involves works that are found online and open access is allowing more people to be able to reach these works.[145]
Politics
[edit]The increased digitalization of media has amplified the influence of digital rhetoric in politics, as it introduces a more direct relationship between politicians and citizens. Digital communication platforms and social networking sites allow citizens to share information and engage in debate with other people of similar or distinct political ideologies, which have been shown to influence and predict the political behavior of individuals outside the digital world.[146] Some politicians have used digital rhetoric as a persuasive tool to communicate information to citizens. Reciprocally, digital rhetoric has enabled increasing political participation among citizens. Theoretical research on digital rhetoric in politics has attributed the increase of political participation to three models: the motivation model, the learning model, and the attitude model.[147]
- The motivation model proposes that digital rhetoric has decreased the opportunity costs of participating in politics since it makes information readily available to the people.[147]
- The learning model established the increase in political participation to the vast amount of political information available on the Internet which increases the inclusion of the citizens in the political process.[147]
- The attitude model extended from the previous two by suggesting that digital rhetoric has changed the perception of citizens towards politics, particularly by providing interactive tools that allow people to engage in the political process.[147]
Online harassment
[edit]Online harassment has, over time, become an increasingly persistent issue, especially on social media.[148][149] Analysis linked cyberbullying-specific behaviors, including perpetration and victimization, to a number of detrimental psychosocial outcomes. The trend of people posting about their characters and lifestyles reinforces stereotypes (such as "hillbillies"), an outcome based on the fact that the rhetoric of difference is a naturalized component of the ethnic and racial identity.[150] Due to limits on the number of characters available to convey a message (for example, Twitter's 280-character limit),[151] messages in digital rhetoric tend to be scarcely explained, allowing stereotypes to flourish. Erika Sparby theorized that anonymity and use pseudonyms or avatars on social media gives users more confidence to address someone or something negatively.[152]
In 2005, these issues led to the launch of the first cyberbullying prevention campaign: STOMP Out Bullying. Like the abundance of campaigns that would form in the next fifteen years, it focuses on creating cyberbullying awareness and reducing and preventing bullying.[153] The challenge of bullying within social media has increased following the rise of "cancel culture", which aims to end the career of a culprit through any means possible, mainly the boycott of their works.[154][155]
More recently, techniques utilizing machine learning and artificial intelligence have become popular in synthesizing deepfakes: realistic but fake videos of people whose faces are swapped out with other people's faces. These kinds of videos can be created by easily obtainable and simple software, inciting concerns that people may use the software to blackmail or bully people online.[156] A large quantity of images containing faces are required to create a deepfake. In addition, specific types of characteristics, such as different exposure and color levels, need to be consistent to make a realistic video. However, given the vast amounts of photos of people publicly available on the Internet from social media sites, there is concern about the extent to which people can use deepfakes as a bullying tactic. There have already been multiple incidents of this kind of harassment being used to bully people. One example involved a mother who used deepfake software to frame a few of her daughter's classmates at school by producing fake videos of them in pornographic videos.[157] Due to machine learning and artificial intelligence being relatively new subfields of computer science and mathematics, there has not been enough time for deepfake video detection technologies to mature, and so far are only detectable using the human eye to spot irregularities in movement of the people in the videos.[158]
Misinformation and disinformation
[edit]While digital rhetoric can often be used to persuade, in some cases it is used to spread false and inaccurate information. The proliferation of illegitimate information over the Internet has given rise to the term misinformation, which is defined as the spread of false claims that may or may not be intended to mislead others.[159] This is not to be confused with disinformation, which is illegitimate or inaccurate information that is spread with the intent to mislead others.[160] Both misinformation and disinformation have consequences towards the knowledge, perceptions, and, in some cases, actions of individuals. Social media specifically has greatly impacted the spread of false information. Scientific facts, such as the damaging environmental impacts of climate change, now come into question on a daily basis.[159]
Social media has contributed to the proliferation of misinformation/disinformation because of its viral and largely unfiltered nature. Everyday users have the power to join and perpetuate a narrative that could be entirely false. In recent years, the term "fake news"—used synonymously with misinformation—has been highly popularized and politicized in digital spaces.[161]
The effects of misinformation were further on display during the 2020 United States presidential election, where social media usage had an impact on Congress.[162] Starting as early as April 2020, then-President Donald Trump tweeted about the dangers of widespread mail voting fraud[163] though studies had shown that mail voting fraud is rare and the dangers are negligible.[164] After losing the election, Trump continued to use Twitter as his main platform to speak about rigged elections, mail-in voter fraud, and other proven falsehoods.[163] On January 6, 2021, Congress was set to certify the results of the 2020 election whilst a rally of Trump supporters were protesting the election results based on Trump's claims of fraud. This assembly of his supporters quickly turned violent, as a mob stormed the Capitol with the intent to overturn election results.[165] The insurrection led to the death of five people.[166] Trump was permanently suspended from Twitter two days later because his involvement in the insurrection violated Twitter's terms and conditions regarding the "glorification of violence".[167] He was also suspended from other major social media sites such as Facebook and YouTube. This incident started a heated debate about social media companies' abilities to limit free speech; ultimately, these companies are still private businesses who are allowed to determine their own terms and conditions as they see fit, which users must agree to in order to use these platforms in the first place.[168]
Legitimacy
[edit]There is controversy regarding the innovative nature of digital rhetoric. Arguments opposed to legitimizing web text are Platonically based, in that they reject the new form of scholarship (web text) and praise the old form (print) in the same way that oral communication was originally favored over written communication.[169] Originally some traditionalists did not regard online open access journals with the same legitimacy as print journals for this reason; however, digital arenas have become the primary place for disseminating academic information in many areas of scholarship.[170] Modern scholars struggle to "claim academic legitimacy" in these new media forms, as the tendency of pedagogy is to write about a subject rather than actively work in it.[171]
Within the past decade, more scholarly texts have been openly accessible, which provides an innovative way for students to gain access to textual materials online for free, such as scholarly journals like Kairos,[172] Harlot of the Arts,[173] and Enculturation.[174]
COVID-19 pandemic
[edit]The persistence of the global COVID-19 pandemic has changed both physical and digital spaces. The resulting isolation and economic shutdowns complicated existing issues and created a new set of globalized challenges as it "imposed" a change to the "psychosocial environment".[175] The pandemic has forced the majority of individuals with Internet access to depend on technology in order to remain connected to the outside world, and on a larger scale, global economies have become reliant on transitioning business to digital platforms.[176]
Additionally, the pandemic forced schools across the globe to switch to an 'online only' approach. By March 25, 2020, all school systems in the United States closed indefinitely.[177] In search of a platform to host online learning, many schools incorporated popular video chat service Zoom as their method of providing socially distant instruction. In April 2020, Zoom was hosting over 300 million daily meetings, as opposed to 10 million in December 2019.[178] The shift to online learning demonstrated the current state of accessibility to digital information while promoting the use of digital learning through Zoom meetings, YouTube videos, and broadcasting systems such as Open Broadcaster Software.[179] Still, it is questioned whether or not the switch to online learning has had detrimental impacts on students. In particular, it has been difficult to transition younger students to completely online models of learning, who often miss the social aspects of a school setting.[180]
The pandemic has also contributed to creating misleading rhetoric in online spaces. Heightened public health concerns combined with the accessibility of social media led to the rapid spread of both misinformation and disinformation regarding COVID-19. Some people online theorized that the deadly virus could be cured by the ingestion of bleach, while others believed the disease to have been intentionally started by China in an attempt to take over the world.[181] Trump also supported taking hydroxychloroquine to prevent the contraction of COVID-19.[182] The World Health Organization (WHO) had advised on numerous occasions that the drug has no signs of preventing the spread of the virus. Despite their illegitimate nature, these conspiracy theories have spread rapidly in digital spaces. As a result, WHO declared the proliferation of misinformation regarding the virus an "infodemic". In response, many social media sites to strengthen their policies relating to false information, but many misleading claims still find their way online.[181]
See also
[edit]- Artificial intelligence rhetoric
- Composition studies
- Computer-mediated communication
- Digital humanities
- Digital literacy
- Digital media
- Hypermedia
- Internet studies
- Media studies
- Technological convergence
- Feminist technoscience
- Technofeminism
References
[edit]- ^ a b c d e f g h i Eyman, Douglas (2015). Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice. Ann Arbor, MI: digitalculturebooks. doi:10.3998/dh.13030181.0001.001. ISBN 978-0-472-07268-2.
- ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q Eyman, Douglas (2015). Digital Rhetoric: Theory, Method, Practice. University of Michigan Press. doi:10.3998/dh.13030181.0001.001. ISBN 978-0-472-05268-4.[page needed]
- ^ Van Den Eede, Yoni; Goeminne, Gert; Van den Bossche, Marc (June 2017). "The Art of Living with Technology: Turning Over Philosophy of Technology's Empirical Turn". Foundations of Science. 22 (2): 235–246. doi:10.1007/s10699-015-9472-5. ISSN 1233-1821. S2CID 147446410.
- ^ a b Boyle, Casey; Brown, James J.; Ceraso, Steph (May 27, 2018). "The Digital: Rhetoric Behind and Beyond the Screen". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 48 (3): 251–259. doi:10.1080/02773945.2018.1454187. S2CID 149842629.
- ^ Ridolfo, Jim (2013). "Delivering Textual Diaspora: Building Digital Cultural Repositories as Rhetoric Research". College English. 76 (2): 136–151. doi:10.58680/ce201324270. ISSN 0010-0994. JSTOR 24238146.
- ^ a b c Hodgson, Justin; Barnett, Scot (November 22, 2016). "Introduction: What is Rhetorical about Digital Rhetoric? Perspectives and Definitions of Digital Rhetoric". Archived from the original on April 27, 2017.
- ^ McCarty, Willard (December 22, 2023). "Digital rhetoric, literae humaniores and Leibniz's dream". Digital Enlightenment Studies. 1 (1). doi:10.61147/des.5.
- ^ McCarty, Willard (December 22, 2023). "Digital rhetoric, literae humaniores and Leibniz's dream". Digital Enlightenment Studies. 1 (1). doi:10.61147/des.5. ISSN 3029-0953.
- ^ Ellis, Allan B. (1964). "The Computer and Character Analysis". The English Journal. 53 (7): 522–527. doi:10.2307/810597. ISSN 0013-8274. JSTOR 810597.
- ^ Daigon, Arthur (1966). "Computer Grading of English Composition". The English Journal. 55 (1): 46–52. doi:10.2307/811145. ISSN 0013-8274. JSTOR 811145.
- ^ Slotnick, Henry B.; Knapp, John V. (1971). "Essay Grading by Computer: A Laboratory Phenomenon?". The English Journal. 60 (1): 75–87. doi:10.2307/813345. ISSN 0013-8274. JSTOR 813345.
- ^ Lanham, R. A. (1994). The Electronic Word: Democracy, Technology, and the Arts. University of Chicago Press. ISBN 978-0-226-46885-3.[page needed]
- ^ Landow, George P. (June 1989). "Hypertext in literary education, criticism, and scholarship". Computers and the Humanities. 23 (3): 173–198. doi:10.1007/BF00056142. ISSN 0010-4817.
- ^ Brent, Doug (Spring 1997). "Rhetorics of the Web". kairos.technorhetoric.net. Retrieved October 9, 2024.
- ^ Heba, Gary (January 1997). "HyperRhetoric: Multimedia, literacy, and the future of composition". Computers and Composition. 14 (1): 19–44. doi:10.1016/S8755-4615(97)90036-0.
- ^ Zappen, James P. (July 2005). "Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory". Technical Communication Quarterly. 14 (3): 319–325. doi:10.1207/s15427625tcq1403_10. ISSN 1057-2252. S2CID 54783060.
- ^ a b c Haas, Angela M. (2018). "Toward a Digital Cultural Rhetoric". The Routledge Handbook of Digital Writing and Rhetoric. pp. 412–422. doi:10.4324/9781315518497-39. ISBN 978-1-315-51849-7.
- ^ Alexander, Jonathan; Rhodes, Jacqueline, eds. (April 27, 2018). The Routledge Handbook of Digital Writing and Rhetoric (1 ed.). Routledge. doi:10.4324/9781315518497. ISBN 978-1-315-51849-7.
- ^ Majdik, Zoltan P.; Graham, S. Scott (May 26, 2024). "Rhetoric of/with AI: An Introduction". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 54 (3): 222–231. doi:10.1080/02773945.2024.2343264. ISSN 0277-3945.
- ^ a b Selber, Stuart A.; Ridolfo, Jim (April 15, 2024). "Stuart A. Selber: What is Digital Rhetoric?". Argumentation et Analyse du Discours. 32 (32). doi:10.4000/aad.8357. ISSN 1565-8961.
- ^ Smith, Arthur L. (March 1971). "Markings of an African concept of rhetoric". Today's Speech. 19 (2): 13–18. doi:10.1080/01463377109368973.
- ^ Ge, Yunfeng (November 2013). "Book review: Anis S Bawarshi and Mary Jo Reiff, Genre: An Introduction to History, Theory, Research, and Pedagogy". Discourse & Society. 24 (6): 833–835. doi:10.1177/0957926513490318c. S2CID 147358289.
- ^ Boyle, Casey; Brown, James J.; Ceraso, Steph (May 27, 2018). "The Digital: Rhetoric Behind and Beyond the Screen". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 48 (3): 251–259. doi:10.1080/02773945.2018.1454187. ISSN 0277-3945. S2CID 149842629.
- ^ Jenkins, Henry; Lashley, Mark C.; Creech, Brian. "Voices for a New Vernacular: A Forum on Digital Storytelling Interview with Henry Jenkins". International Journal of Communication. 11: 1061–1068 – via EBSCOhost.
- ^ a b Wittke, Volker; Hanekop, Heidemarie, eds. (2011). New Forms of Collaborative Innovation and Production on the Internet: An Interdisciplinary Perspective (PDF). Universitätsverlag Göttingen. ISBN 978-3-86395-020-0.
- ^ Olson, Judith S.; Olson, Gary M. (2014). Working Together Apart: Collaboration Over the Internet. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered Informatics (SLHCI). Morgan & Claypool. ISBN 9781608450510. [page needed]
- ^ a b Brabham, Daren C. (2013). Crowdsourcing (PDF). Essential Knowledge. MIT Press. ISBN 9780262518475.
- ^ Welch, Kathleen E.; Barrett, Edward (1999). Electric Rhetoric: Classical Rhetoric, Oralism, and a New Literacy. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-23202-9.[page needed]
- ^ a b Chapman, Nigel; Chapman, Jenny (2000). Digital Multimedia (1st ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, LTD. ISBN 978-0-471-98386-6.[page needed]
- ^ Shifman, Limor (2014). Memes in Digital Culture. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-52543-5.
- ^ Giselsson, Kristi (May 31, 2020). "Critical Thinking and Critical Literacy: Mutually Exclusive?". International Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. 14 (1). doi:10.20429/ijsotl.2020.140105.
- ^ Norris, Katherine; Lucas, Lisa; Prudhoe, Catherine (2012). "Preparing Preservice Teachers to Use Critical Literacy in the Early Childhood Classroom" (PDF). Multicultural Education. Promising Practices. 19 (2): 52–62, 62. S2CID 26401103 – via Google Scholar.
- ^ "Critical Literacy in A Digital Era: Technology, Rhetoric, and the Public interest". Routledge & CRC Press. Retrieved February 21, 2022.
- ^ "Critical Literacy – Developing your critical literacy skills". The University of Melbourne. 2018.
- ^ Shao, Chencheng; et al. (2017). "The Spread of Fake News by Social Bots". arXiv:1707.07592v1 [cs.SI]. Andy Black Associates.
- ^ Pius Nedumkallel, Jose (January 2020). "Interactivity of Digital Media: Literature Review and Future Research Agenda". International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies. 10 (1): 13–30. doi:10.4018/IJICST.2020010102. ISSN 2155-4218.
- ^ Zaefferer, Dietmar (August 22, 2008), "Language as mind sharing device: Mental and linguistic concepts in a general ontology of everyday life", Language as mind sharing device: Mental and, De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 193–230, doi:10.1515/9783110197792.2.193, ISBN 978-3-11-019779-2, retrieved October 19, 2024
- ^ Grewal, Dhruv; Herhausen, Dennis; Ludwig, Stephan; Villarroel Ordenes, Francisco (June 1, 2022). "The Future of Digital Communication Research: Considering Dynamics and Multimodality". Journal of Retailing. 98 (2): 224–240. doi:10.1016/j.jretai.2021.01.007. hdl:11585/981477. ISSN 0022-4359.
- ^ DeVoss, Jim Ridolfo and Dànielle Nicole (January 15, 2009). "Composing for Recomposition: Rhetorical Velocity and Delivery". 13.2. Retrieved October 19, 2024.
- ^ a b c Marwick, Alice (November 2013). "Memes". Contexts. 12 (4): 12–13. doi:10.1177/1536504213511210. ISSN 1536-5042.
- ^ a b c d Bogost, Ian (2008). "The Rhetoric of Video Games". The Ecology of Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-69364-6.
- ^ a b c Gonzalo, Frasca (2003). "Simulation versus Narrative: Introduction to Ludology". In Wolf, Mark J.P.; Perron, Bernard (eds.). The Video Game Theory Reader. New York: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-96579-8.
- ^ Ridolfo, J. & Devoss, D. (2009). "Composing for Recomposition: Rhetorical Velocity and Delivery". Kairos. 13 (2).
- ^ Morey, Sean (2017). The digital writer. Southlake, TX: Fountainhead Press. ISBN 978-1-68036-354-8. OCLC 1018379426.
- ^ Morey, Sean (2017). The Digital Writer. Southlake, Texas: Fountainhead Press. pp. 37–70. ISBN 978-1-68036-354-8.
- ^ Reyman, J. (2013). "User Data on the Social Web: Authorship, Agency, and Appropriation" (PDF). College English. 75 (5): 513–532. doi:10.58680/ce201323565. Retrieved November 1, 2014 – via ncte.org.
- ^ Jones, Madison; Beveridge, Aaron; Garrison, Julian R.; Greene, Abbey; MacDonald, Hannah (2022). "Tracking Memes in the Wild: Visual Rhetoric and Image Circulation in Environmental Communication". Frontiers in Communication. 7. doi:10.3389/fcomm.2022.883278. ISSN 2297-900X.
- ^ Handa, C. (2004). "Reading the Visual in College Writing Classes By Charles Hill". Visual rhetoric in a digital world: A critical sourcebook. Boston: Bedford/St. Martins.[page needed]
- ^ Hocks, Mary E. (2003). "Understanding Visual Rhetoric in Digital Writing Environments". College Composition and Communication. 54 (4): 629–656. doi:10.2307/3594188. JSTOR 3594188. S2CID 142341944.
- ^ Ulfsdotter, Boel; Rogers, Anna B., eds. (2018). Female Agency and Documentary Strategies: Subjectivities, Identity and Activism. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. ISBN 9781474444699.
- ^ Citron, Danielle; Chesney, Robert (January 1, 2019). "Deepfakes and the New Disinformation War". Foreign Affairs.
- ^ Szablewicz, Marcella (2020), Szablewicz, Marcella (ed.), ""Losers" "Acting Gay": Internet Slang, Memes, and Affective Intensities", Mapping Digital Game Culture in China: From Internet Addicts to Esports Athletes, East Asian Popular Culture, Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 135–165, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-36111-2_6, ISBN 978-3-030-36111-2, S2CID 213137393
- ^ "The Language of Memes: A Brief Explanation". Whatever. June 30, 2018. Retrieved February 17, 2022.
- ^ Marwick, Alice (November 2013). "Memes". Contexts. 12 (4): 12–13. doi:10.1177/1536504213511210. ISSN 1536-5042.
- ^ a b Matamoros Fernandez, Ariadna (2018). "Inciting anger through Facebook reactions in Belgium: The use of emoji and related vernacular expressions in racist discourse". First Monday. 23 (9): Article number: 94051–20. ISSN 1396-0466.
- ^ Porter, James E. (December 2009). "Recovering Delivery for Digital Rhetoric". Computers and Composition. 26 (4): 207–224. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2009.09.004.
- ^ Kolko, Beth E. (August 1999). "Representing Bodies in Virtual Space: The Rhetoric of Avatar Design". The Information Society. 15 (3): 177–186. doi:10.1080/019722499128484.
- ^ Woolums, Viola (Fall 2011). "Gendered Avatar Identity". Kairos. 16 (1).
- ^ a b Cross, Katherine. "The Queer Avatar of Failure | By: Katherine Cross | Making & Breaking". Making and Breaking. Retrieved March 2, 2022.
- ^ Johnson, Nathan R. (April 2, 2012). "Information Infrastructure as Rhetoric: Tools for Analysis". Poroi. 8 (1): 1–3. doi:10.13008/2151-2957.1113. ISSN 2151-2957.
- ^ Johnson, Nathan R. (April 2, 2012). "Information Infrastructure as Rhetoric: Tools for Analysis". Poroi. 8 (1): 1–3. doi:10.13008/2151-2957.1113. ISSN 2151-2957.
- ^ a b Vee, Annette; Brown, Jr (January 15, 2016). "Rhetoric Special Issue Editorial Introduction". Computational Culture (5). ISSN 2047-2390.
- ^ a b Lewis, Justin (2016). "Content Management Systems, Bittorrent Trackers, and Large-Scale Rhetorical Genres". Journal of Technical Writing and Communication. 46 (1): 4–26. doi:10.1177/0047281615600634. S2CID 148056468.
- ^ Balsamo, Anne Marie (2011). Designing culture: the technological imagination at work. Durham [NC]: Duke University Press. ISBN 978-0-8223-4433-9. OCLC 682893337.
- ^ Bivens, Rena (June 2017). "The gender binary will not be deprogrammed: Ten years of coding gender on Facebook". New Media & Society. 19 (6): 880–898. doi:10.1177/1461444815621527. ISSN 1461-4448. S2CID 36100953.
- ^ Plant, Robert (January 2004). "Online communities". Technology in Society. 26 (1): 51–65. doi:10.1016/j.techsoc.2003.10.005.
- ^ Arduser, Lora (January 2011). "Warp and Weft: Weaving the Discussion Threads of an Online Community". Journal of Technical Writing and Communication. 41 (1): 5–31. doi:10.2190/TW.41.1.b. S2CID 144656923.
- ^ O'Neill, Tully (March 1, 2018). "'Today I Speak': Exploring How Victim-Survivors Use Reddit". International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy. 7 (1): 44–59. doi:10.5204/ijcjsd.v7i1.402.
- ^ Nadim, Marjan; Fladmoe, Audun (July 30, 2019). "Silencing Women? Gender and Online Harassment". Social Science Computer Review. 39 (2): 245–258. doi:10.1177/0894439319865518. hdl:11250/2608353. ISSN 0894-4393. S2CID 201127019.
- ^ "The State of Online Harassment". Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. January 13, 2021. Retrieved March 2, 2021.
- ^ Gallagher, John R. (September 2017). "Writing for Algorithmic Audiences". Computers and Composition. 45: 25–35. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2017.06.002.
- ^ Adams, Heather Brook; Applegarth, Risa; Simpson, Amber Hester (September 2020). "Acting with Algorithms: Feminist Propositions for Rhetorical Agency". Computers and Composition. 57: 102581. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2020.102581. S2CID 225324822.
- ^ a b Waller, Isaac; Anderson, Ashton (2021). "Quantifying social organization and political polarization in online platforms". Nature. 600 (7888): 264–268. arXiv:2010.00590. Bibcode:2021Natur.600..264W. doi:10.1038/s41586-021-04167-x. ISSN 1476-4687. PMID 34853472. S2CID 236469369.
- ^ a b Dijck, José van (2013). The culture of connectivity: a critical history of social media. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-997079-7. OCLC 839305263.
- ^ a b c Carter Olson, Candi (September 2, 2016). "#BringBackOurGirls: digital communities supporting real-world change and influencing mainstream media agendas". Feminist Media Studies. 16 (5): 772–787. doi:10.1080/14680777.2016.1154887. S2CID 216643349.
- ^ a b Swart, Joëlle (April 2021). "Experiencing Algorithms: How Young People Understand, Feel About, and Engage With Algorithmic News Selection on Social Media". Social Media + Society. 7 (2): 205630512110088. doi:10.1177/20563051211008828. ISSN 2056-3051. S2CID 234860990.
- ^ McNely, Brian J. (October 2012). "Shaping organizational image-power through images: Case histories of Instagram". 2012 IEEE International Professional Communication Conference. pp. 1–8. doi:10.1109/IPCC.2012.6408624. ISBN 978-1-4577-2126-7. S2CID 1526078.
- ^ Mann, Benjamin W (December 1, 2018). "Rhetoric of Online Disability Activism: #CripTheVote and Civic Participation". Communication, Culture and Critique. 11 (4): 604–621. doi:10.1093/ccc/tcy030.
- ^ Rodino-Colocino, Michelle (January 2, 2018). "Me too, #MeToo: countering cruelty with empathy". Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies. 15 (1): 96–100. doi:10.1080/14791420.2018.1435083. ISSN 1479-1420.
- ^ Kaun, Anne; Uldam, Julie (June 2018). "Digital activism: After the hype". New Media & Society. 20 (6): 2099–2106. doi:10.1177/1461444817731924. ISSN 1461-4448.
- ^ Harrigan, Paul; Daly, Timothy M.; Coussement, Kristof; Lee, Julie A.; Soutar, Geoffrey N.; Evers, Uwana (February 1, 2021). "Identifying influencers on social media". International Journal of Information Management. 56: 102246. doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102246. ISSN 0268-4012. S2CID 225115867.
- ^ Zalat, Marwa Mohamed; Hamed, Mona Sami; Bolbol, Sarah Abdelhalim (March 26, 2021). "The experiences, challenges, and acceptance of e-learning as a tool for teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic among university medical staff". PLOS ONE. 16 (3): e0248758. Bibcode:2021PLoSO..1648758Z. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0248758. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 7997029. PMID 33770079.
- ^ Rappanta, C. (2020). "Online University Teaching During and After the Covid-19 Crisis: Refocusing Teacher Presence and Learning Activity". Postdigit Sci Educ. 2 (3): 923–945. doi:10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y. S2CID 220381810.
- ^ Rapanta, Chrysi; Botturi, Luca; Goodyear, Peter; Guàrdia, Lourdes; Koole, Marguerite (October 1, 2020). "Online University Teaching During and After the Covid-19 Crisis: Refocusing Teacher Presence and Learning Activity". Postdigital Science and Education. 2 (3): 923–945. doi:10.1007/s42438-020-00155-y. ISSN 2524-4868. PMC 7339092.
- ^ Patricia Aguilera-Hermida, A. (January 1, 2020). "College students' use and acceptance of emergency online learning due to COVID-19". International Journal of Educational Research Open. 1: 100011. doi:10.1016/j.ijedro.2020.100011. ISSN 2666-3740. PMC 7480788. PMID 35059662.
- ^ a b c "Procedural Rhetorics – Rhetoric's Procedures: Rhetorical Peaks and What It Means to Win the Game | Currents in Electronic Literacy". currents.dwrl.utexas.edu. Retrieved February 24, 2021.
- ^ Frossard, Frédérique; Trifonova, Anna; Barajas, Mario (2015). "Teachers Designing Learning Games". Video Games and Creativity. pp. 159–183. doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-801462-2.00008-4. ISBN 978-0-12-801462-2.
- ^ a b "Rhetorical Peaks: A Design for Teaching Rhetoric in a Gaming Environment | Welcome to the DWRL". www.dwrl.utexas.edu. Retrieved March 3, 2021.
- ^ "COD 101: Definitions of Common Call of Duty®: Modern Warfare® Terms". blog.activision.com.
- ^ Vorderer, Peter; Bryant, Jennings (2012). Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses, and Consequences. Taylor and Francis. ISBN 978-0-203-87370-0. OCLC 847370576.[page needed]
- ^ Leach, Rebecca; Dehnert, Marco (January 2, 2021). "Becoming the other: examining race, gender, and sexuality in Detroit: Become Human". Review of Communication. 21 (1): 23–32. doi:10.1080/15358593.2021.1892173. S2CID 233402236.
- ^ Detweiler, Eric (April 3, 2019). "Sounding Out the Progymnasmata". Rhetoric Review. 38 (2): 205–218. doi:10.1080/07350198.2019.1588567. ISSN 0735-0198. S2CID 151021917.
- ^ "Soundwriting Pedagogies / CCDP". ccdigitalpress.org. Retrieved April 23, 2023.
- ^ Choong & Bjork (2023). "The Student-Podcaster as Narrator of Social Change?". library.ncte.org. Retrieved April 23, 2023.
- ^ a b Verhulsdonck, Gustav (2014). "Digital Rhetoric and Globalization". Digital Rhetoric and Global Literacies. Advances in Linguistics and Communication Studies. pp. 1–40. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4916-3.ch001. ISBN 978-1-4666-4916-3.
- ^ Rose, Jessica (August 12, 2016). The Rhetoric of the iPhone: A Cultural Gateway Of Our Transforming Digital Paradigm. English Theses (Thesis). OCLC 956496762.
- ^ Butts, Shannon; Jones, Madison (May 20, 2021). "Deep mapping for environmental communication design". Communication Design Quarterly. 9 (1): 4–19. doi:10.1145/3437000.3437001. S2CID 234794773.
- ^ Campbell, Jessica (October 12, 2021). "Mobile Interface Theory: A Conceptual Tool for Identifying Digital Rhetoric in a Mobile Context". The 39th ACM International Conference on Design of Communication. New York, NY: ACM. pp. 31–37. doi:10.1145/3472714.3473620. ISBN 9781450386289. S2CID 238638870.
- ^ a b Greengard, Samuel (2019). Virtual Reality. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. pp. xi-4.
- ^ Basaraba, Nicole; Arnds, Peter; Edmond, Jennifer; Conlan, Owen (2021). "New Media Ecology and Theoretical Foundations for Nonfiction Digital Narrative Creative Practice". Narrative. 29 (3): 374–395. doi:10.1353/nar.2021.0017. ISSN 1538-974X.
- ^ a b c d De Hertogh, Lori Beth (March 2019). "'Feminist Leaning:' Tracing Technofeminist and Intersectional Practices and Values in Three Decades of Computers and Composition". Computers and Composition. 51: 4–13. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2018.11.004.
- ^ a b Haas, Angela (March 2019). "Introduction by the Guest Editors". Computers and Composition. 51: 1–3. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2018.11.007.
- ^ Pain, Paromita (November 2021). ""It took me quite a long time to develop a voice": Examining feminist digital activism in the Indian #MeToo movement". New Media & Society. 23 (11): 3139–3155. doi:10.1177/1461444820944846. ISSN 1461-4448.
- ^ a b Glenn, Cheryl (2020). "The Language of Rhetorical Feminism, Anchored in Hope". Open Linguistics. 6 (1): 334–343. doi:10.1515/opli-2020-0023. S2CID 221158415.
- ^ Blanchard, Anita (2004). "Blogs as Virtual Communities: Identifying a Sense of Community in the Julie/Julia Project". Into the Blogosphere.
- ^ Duthely, Regina (April 3, 2017). "Black Feminist Hip-Hop Rhetorics and the Digital Public Sphere". Changing English. 24 (2): 202–212. doi:10.1080/1358684X.2017.1310458. S2CID 148707986.
- ^ Lindemann, Gesa; Schünemann, David (December 1, 2020). "Presence in Digital Spaces: A Phenomenological Concept of Presence in Mediatized Communication". Human Studies. 43 (4): 627–651. doi:10.1007/s10746-020-09567-y. ISSN 1572-851X. S2CID 234389563.
- ^ a b "Teaching Digital Rhetoric: Community, Critical Engagement, and Application". Pedagogy: Critical Approaches to Teaching Literature, Language, Composition, and Culture. 6 (2): 231–259. April 1, 2006. doi:10.1215/15314200-2005-003. S2CID 201766824. Project MUSE 197069.
- ^ a b Volkova, Liliia V.; Lizunova, Larisa R.; Komarova, Iuliia A. (December 30, 2021). "Digital pedagogy: Problems and solutions". Revista on line de Política e Gestão Educacional: 3140–3152. doi:10.22633/rpge.v25iesp.5.16003. ISSN 1519-9029.
- ^ Volkova, Liliia V.; Lizunova, Larisa R.; Komarova, Iuliia A. (December 30, 2021). "Digital pedagogy: Problems and solutions". Revista on line de Política e Gestão Educacional: 3140–3152. doi:10.22633/rpge.v25iesp.5.16003. ISSN 1519-9029.
- ^ Bryant, John; Isbell, Mary; Ohge, Christopher; Zimmer, Mary Erica (June 21, 2024). "Digital Editing and Pedagogy". Scholarly Editing Journal. 41. doi:10.55520/KBS01GGN. ISSN 2167-1257.
- ^ "Jeff Grabill | Office of the Provost | Michigan State University". provost.msu.edu. Retrieved February 13, 2020.
- ^ "Dr. Cheryl E. Ball".
- ^ "External Review – Dr. Cheryl E. Ball". Retrieved November 3, 2024.
- ^ Albrecht-Crane, Christa (2015). "Understanding Rhetoric: A Graphic Guide to Writing by Elizabeth Losh et al. (review)". Rocky Mountain Review of Language and Literature. 69 (1): 104–107. Project MUSE 580813.
- ^ a b Gagich, Melanie (June 7, 2018). "Using Digital Rhetoric in a Multimodal Assignment to Disrupt Traditional Academic Writing: Conventions in a First-Year Writing Classroom". The Journal of Interactive Technology and Pedagogy, Issue 13. Retrieved February 17, 2022.
- ^ a b Bjork, Collin (September 1, 2018). "Integrating Usability Testing with Digital Rhetoric in OWI". Computers and Composition. 49: 12. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2018.05.009. ISSN 8755-4615. S2CID 196160668.
- ^ a b Malone, Lauren Ashley (2020). Intersectional digital rhetoric pedagogy: Queer & trans people of color and digital platform engagement (Thesis). Iowa State University. doi:10.31274/etd-20200624-193.
- ^ a b Kill, Melanie (June 1, 2015), Hirsch, Brett D. (ed.), "16. Teaching Digital Rhetoric: Wikipedia, Collaboration, and the Politics of Free Knowledge", Digital Humanities Pedagogy : Practices, Principles and Politics, Digital Humanities Series, Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, pp. 389–405, ISBN 978-2-8218-5403-1, retrieved February 15, 2022
- ^ a b c Maza, Antonio José Planells de la (2020). "Los videojuegos como mundos ludoficcionales críticos: el caso de la crisis política española en el ocio digital móvil (2008–2015)". Comunicación y Sociedad (in Spanish): 1–16. doi:10.32870/cys.v2020.7365. ISSN 2448-9042. S2CID 225686398.
- ^ a b Gee, James Paul (May 2004). "What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy". Education + Training. 46 (4). doi:10.1108/et.2004.00446dae.002. ISSN 0040-0912 – via St. Martin's Griffen.
- ^ Boyle, Casey; Brown, James J.; Ceraso, Steph (May 27, 2018). "The Digital: Rhetoric Behind and Beyond the Screen". Rhetoric Society Quarterly. 48 (3): 251–259. doi:10.1080/02773945.2018.1454187. ISSN 0277-3945. S2CID 149842629.
- ^ Salmieri, Luca (2019). "The Rhetoric of Digitalization in Italian Educational Policies: Situating Reception among Digitally Skilled Teachers". Italian Journal of Sociology of Education. 11 (2/2019): 162–183. doi:10.14658/pupj-ijse-2019-1-8. ISSN 2035-4983.
- ^ a b "Guiding Principles for Use of Technology with Early Learners". Office of Educational Technology. Retrieved February 28, 2022.
- ^ a b "Elizabeth Losh". losh.ucsd.edu.
- ^ Losh, E. (2009). Virtualpolitik. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-12304-4.
- ^ Losh, Elizabeth (2009). Virtualpolitik: An Electronic History of Government Media-Making in a Time of War, Scandal, Disaster, Miscommunication, and Mistakes (PDF). MIT. pp. 47–48. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 23, 2014. Retrieved April 24, 2015.
- ^ a b "Looking Back and Looking Forward: Digital Rhetoric as Evolving Field | enculturation". enculturation.net. Retrieved February 24, 2022.
- ^ Banks, Adam J (2011). Digital griots: African American rhetoric in a multimedia age. Southern Illinois University Press. ISBN 978-0-8093-3020-1. OCLC 977841399.[page needed]
- ^ Gajjala, Radhika (March 2003). "South Asian digital diasporas and cyberfeminist webs: negotiating globalization, nation, gender and information technology design". Contemporary South Asia. 12 (1): 41–56. doi:10.1080/0958493032000123362. S2CID 143325390.
- ^ McKee, Heidi; Porter, James E. (2008). "The Ethics of Digital Writing Research: A Rhetorical Approach". College Composition and Communication. 59 (4): 711–749. doi:10.58680/ccc20086675. ISSN 0010-096X. JSTOR 20457031.
- ^ a b Goodyear, Victoria A. (May 27, 2017). "Social media, apps and wearable technologies: navigating ethical dilemmas and procedures". Qualitative Research in Sport, Exercise and Health. 9 (3): 285–302. doi:10.1080/2159676X.2017.1303790. ISSN 2159-676X. S2CID 151680280.
- ^ Rösner, Leonie; Krämer, Nicole C. (July 2016). "Verbal Venting in the Social Web: Effects of Anonymity and Group Norms on Aggressive Language Use in Online Comments". Social Media + Society. 2 (3). doi:10.1177/2056305116664220. ISSN 2056-3051.
- ^ Zappen, James P. (July 2005). "Digital Rhetoric: Toward an Integrated Theory". Technical Communication Quarterly. 14 (3): 319–325. doi:10.1207/s15427625tcq1403_10. ISSN 1057-2252. S2CID 54783060.
- ^ Kandy Woodfield, ed. (2018). The ethics of online research. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing. ISBN 978-1-78714-485-9. OCLC 1020570628.
- ^ a b Basaraba, Nicole; Arnds, Peter; Edmond, Jennifer; Conlan, Owen (2021). "New Media Ecology and Theoretical Foundations for Nonfiction Digital Narrative Creative Practice". Narrative. 29 (3): 374–395. doi:10.1353/nar.2021.0017. ISSN 1538-974X.
- ^ a b Landowska, Alina; Rocci, Andrea; Koszowy, Marcin (April 3, 2024). "Współczesna prolepsis w retoryce cyfrowej: role i funkcje wskazówek proleptycznych | Res Rhetorica". Res Rhetorica (in Polish). 11 (1): 138–154. doi:10.29107/rr2024.1.10.
- ^ Lohr, Steve (December 4, 2018). "Digital Divide Is Wider Than We Think, Study Says". The New York Times.
- ^ Reynolds, Thomas J.; Lewis, Charles R. (January 1997). "The changing topography of computer access for composition students". Computers and Composition. 14 (2): 269–278. doi:10.1016/S8755-4615(97)90027-X.
- ^ Hea, Amy C.K., ed. (2009). Going Wireless: A Critical Exploration of Wireless and Mobile Technologies for Composition Teachers and Researchers. Cresskill, N.J.: Hampton Press. pp. 15–33.
- ^ a b Smedley, Brian D.; Stith, Adrienne Y.; Colburn, Lois; Evans, Clyde H.; Medicine (US), Institute of (2001). Inequality in Teaching and Schooling: How Opportunity Is Rationed to Students of Color in America. National Academies Press (US).
- ^ Haas, Angela M. (2008). "Wampum as Hypertext: An American Indian Intellectual Tradition of Multimedia Theory and Practice". Studies in American Indian Literatures. 19 (4): 77–100. doi:10.1353/ail.2008.0005. S2CID 144801330.
- ^ Wattal, Sunil; Hong, Yili; Mandviwalla, Munir; Jain, Abhijit (January 2011). "Technology Diffusion in the Society: Analyzing Digital Divide in the Context of Social Class". 2011 44th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. pp. 1–10. doi:10.1109/HICSS.2011.398. ISBN 978-1-4244-9618-1. S2CID 6222264.
- ^ Resnick, Brian (June 3, 2019). "The war to free science". Vox. Retrieved February 17, 2021.
- ^ Steinhart, Gail. "LibGuides: Open Access Publishing: What is Open Access?". guides.library.cornell.edu. Retrieved February 17, 2021.
- ^ Himelboim, Itai; Lariscy, Ruthann Weaver; Tinkham, Spencer F.; Sweetser, Kaye D. (February 29, 2012). "Social Media and Online Political Communication: The Role of Interpersonal Informational Trust and Openness". Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media. 56 (1): 92–115. doi:10.1080/08838151.2011.648682. S2CID 144127370.
- ^ a b c d Jiang, Liang (October 2, 2017). "Why context matters: the role of campaign context in the relationship between digital media use and political participation". Australian Journal of Political Science. 52 (4): 580–598. doi:10.1080/10361146.2017.1373064. S2CID 158661419.
- ^ Vogels, Emily A. (January 13, 2021). "The State of Online Harassment". Pew Research Center: Internet, Science & Tech. Retrieved November 10, 2023.
- ^ "Online Hate and Harassment: The American Experience 2023". ADL. 2023. Retrieved November 10, 2023.
- ^ Massey, Carissa (Spring 2018). "The rhetoric of the real: stereotypes of rural youth in American reality television and stock photography". Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education. 38 (3): 365–376. doi:10.1080/01596306.2017.1306982.
- ^ "Counting characters". Twitter Developer Platform. Retrieved March 3, 2021.
- ^ Sparby, Erika M. (September 2017). "Digital Social Media and Aggression: Memetic Rhetoric in 4chan's Collective Identity". Computers and Composition. 45: 85–97. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2017.06.006.
- ^ Tucker, Bradford (October 23, 2015). "Anti-Bullying Organizations and Resources - Array BC". Array Behavioral Care. Retrieved October 22, 2024.
- ^ Romano, Aja (December 30, 2019). "Why we can't stop fighting about cancel culture". Vox. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
- ^ Norris, Pippa (February 2023). "Cancel Culture: Myth or Reality?". Political Studies. 71 (1): 145–174. doi:10.1177/00323217211037023. ISSN 0032-3217.
- ^ Smith, Hannah E.; JD (October 4, 2021). "Deepfakes: Technology's Dark Side". North Carolina Divorce Lawyers Blog. Retrieved February 16, 2022.
- ^ Hinduja, Sameer (March 16, 2021). "Deepfakes and Cyberbullying". Cyberbullying Research Center. Retrieved February 16, 2022.
- ^ "Deep Fakes and Social Media: A Q&A With Alex Cohen". Digital.gov. June 8, 2021. Retrieved February 16, 2022.
- ^ a b Bloomfield, Emma Frances; Tillery, Denise (January 2, 2019). "The Circulation of Climate Change Denial Online: Rhetorical and Networking Strategies on Facebook". Environmental Communication. 13 (1): 23–34. Bibcode:2019Ecomm..13...23B. doi:10.1080/17524032.2018.1527378. ISSN 1752-4032. S2CID 149955425.
- ^ Fallis, Don (December 2015). "What Is Disinformation?". Library Trends. 63 (3): 401–426. doi:10.1353/lib.2015.0014. hdl:2142/89818. ISSN 1559-0682.
- ^ Gelfert, Axel (2018). "Fake News: A Definition". Informal Logic. 38 (1): 84–117. doi:10.22329/il.v38i1.5068. ISSN 0824-2577. S2CID 55730612.
- ^ Miao, Hannah (November 4, 2020). "2020 election sees record high turnout with at least 159.8 million votes projected". CNBC. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
- ^ a b Hutzler, Alexandra (February 10, 2021). "Trump started tweeting about election fraud in April 2020, eight months before Capitol riot". Newsweek. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
- ^ Farley, Robert (April 10, 2020). "Trump's Latest Voter Fraud Misinformation". FactCheck.org. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
- ^ Subramanian, Courtney. "A minute-by-minute timeline of Trump's day as the Capitol siege unfolded on Jan. 6". USA TODAY. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
- ^ Healy, Jack (January 11, 2021). "These Are the 5 People Who Died in the Capitol Riot". The New York Times.
- ^ "Permanent suspension of @realDonaldTrump". blog.twitter.com. Retrieved February 19, 2021.
- ^ Denham, Hannah. "These are the platforms that have banned Trump and his allies". Washington Post.
- ^ Borgman, Christine (2007). Scholarship in a Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. p. 78. doi:10.7551/mitpress/7434.001.0001. ISBN 9780262255783. JSTOR ctt5hhbk7.
- ^ Dunham, Gary. "What are Trends in Scholarly Publishing?". Archived from the original on April 30, 2012.
- ^ Ball, C (2004). "Show, not tell: The value of new media scholarship". Computers and Composition. 21 (4): 403–425. doi:10.1016/j.compcom.2004.08.001.
- ^ "Kairos: A Journal of Rhetoric, Technology, and Pedagogy". kairos.technorhetoric.net.
- ^ Harlot of the Arts
- ^ "enculturation | A Journal of Rhetoric, Writing, and Culture". www.enculturation.net.
- ^ Fegert, Jörg M.; Vitiello, Benedetto; Plener, Paul L.; Clemens, Vera (May 12, 2020). "Challenges and burden of the Coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for child and adolescent mental health: a narrative review to highlight clinical and research needs in the acute phase and the long return to normality". Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health. 14 (1): 20. doi:10.1186/s13034-020-00329-3. ISSN 1753-2000. PMC 7216870. PMID 32419840.
- ^ Ganichev, N. A.; Koshovets, O. B. (February 19, 2021). "Forcing the Digital Economy: How will the Structure of Digital Markets Change as a Result of the COVID-19 Pandemic". Studies on Russian Economic Development. 32 (1): 11–22. doi:10.1134/S1075700721010056. ISSN 1075-7007. PMC 7893839. PMID 33642845.
- ^ "The Coronavirus Spring: The Historic Closing of U.S. Schools (A Timeline)". Education Week. July 2, 2020. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
- ^ "Zoom Revenue and Usage Statistics (2020)". Business of Apps. April 9, 2020. Retrieved February 18, 2021.
- ^ Subhi, M A; Nurjanah, N; Kosasih, U; Rahman, S A (October 2020). "Design of distance lectures in mathematics education with the use of the integration of Zoom and YouTube application". Journal of Physics: Conference Series. 1663 (1): 012058. Bibcode:2020JPhCS1663a2058S. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1663/1/012058.
- ^ Adnan, Muhammad; Anwar, Kainat (2020). "Online Learning amid the COVID-19 Pandemic: Students' Perspectives". Online Submission. 2 (1): 45–51.
- ^ a b Nguyen, An; Catalan-Matamoros, Daniel (June 25, 2020). "Digital Mis/Disinformation and Public Engagement with Health and Science Controversies: Fresh Perspectives from Covid-19". Media and Communication. 8 (2): 323–328. doi:10.17645/mac.v8i2.3352. hdl:10016/30664. S2CID 222228241.
- ^ Lewis, Sophie (March 2, 2021). "Hydroxychloroquine, once touted by Trump, should not be used to prevent COVID-19, WHO experts say". CBS News.