As far as our projects go, I remember hearing that they were supposed to be group projects—but the syllabus doesn’t seem to be on Vista in order for me to verify this. So, unsure if I will have to align my ideas to those of others, I’m going to solider on and do some more brainstorming.
On a side note, can you (Pam) put up that brainstorming document on Vista (we did this in our last class)? That would help out a lot with future planning.
Obviously, my idea is going to involve the Internet in some way. I think I have a little bit of an edge in this subject due to A.) the fact that most of my waking life is been spent online, and B.) I’m involved in some pretty large communities from which I can gather a lot of data. When it comes to the latter point, I have a lot of experience as a producer and consumer of online text, so I have a lot of information to draw upon. But what exactly am I looking for?
After looking at the ideas I generated last Monday, I think I may want to focus on the role Web 2.0 is playing in changing the way online texts are produced. Today, it’s very strange when an article/blog post does not allow comments; in fact, one of the blogs I read doesn’t have comments enabled, and it’s a constant source of annoyance—especially when I have something to say. I’m thinking about looking at how online reading has become more of a dialogic process as opposed to how monologic it used to be. Before, discussion and reactions to an Internet article were once relegated to message boards tucked away in the corners of a web site (if they existed at all). Now, your comments on an article from The Onion's AV Clubcan have just as much space and visibility the writer’s own text on that very page--despite your lack of expertise on the matter.
See? I used the words “monologic” and “dialogic.” If that’s not a setup for a good grad school paper, I don’t know what is.
As said in class, with the advent of Web 2.0, many articles/blog posts are now left open-ended, or are written with the intention to produce more text than the writer has produced in said article/blog post. Speaking from personal experience, I’ve done this many times at the different blogs I work/worked for; and there’s often a sense that the article is not “complete” until those comments are added. As with my most recent post here, I’m also seeking a reaction to the news I posted about—and it’s not just because I’m a lazy blogger. I could have asked people their reaction to this issue, and then added these quotes to my post, but that’s really not how things are done on the Internet now. If I had closed the subject, there would be no room for discussion or response; and my duties as a blogger include both generating and moderating conversation.
Generally, I’m wondering if I can write about the shift from monologic to dialogic writing online—if I’m using those terms correctly. I guess my research question would be “How is Web 2.0 changing the role of online writers?”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
That's an interesting idea, Bob. Maybe you could look at how readers of a blog might consider their response during the act of reading the post. I.e., do they think about what they might write as a response while they are in the middle of reading the original post? If this happens regularly, does it support your question regarding online writing being dialogic? I'm not sure how you'd test this, maybe with read-aloud protocols? Sit someone down, have them read a blog post and articulate their thoughts while they read? Something to consider.
Post a Comment