Cyberlife--WRAC 237-43& 256-61

In response to the Discussion and Writing question 2 on pg. 258.

I strongly agree that blogs will not go away any time soon. Blogs are like online diaries to many people. A lot of people love to write what is within them. Expressing feelings is a main reason why people write in blogs. People like to show other people their feelings; to put a piece of themselves on the internet. If blogs are to last (which I believe will stay around for a while as I stated earlier), then people will be the ones to keep it going. As long as people keep posting and reading blogs, then they will stay alive.

Prior to reading this article, I read maybe only one blog, which was done by one of my friends. That was when I first heard about blogs and what they were. It was interesting; my friend had pretty much all of her life posted in her blog. I personally still didn’t keep a blog because I preferred to write in a journal.

The reason why I believe that blogs will stick around for a while is because of some of the reasons for creating blogs that Dvorak makes at the end of his article. Although Dvorak gives five reasons that people create blogs, I believe that two of the reasons, Elimination of Frustration and Societal need to share, are the most likely reasons that people create blogs.

As I stated earlier, blogs are places where people can show others their feelings. Elimination of frustration is a big reason why people create blogs, in my opinion. In my experience, people who are angry like to pour out their anger on paper. Especially if they have no one to vent to. Why not vent to the paper? Why not vent to all the other people in the world through the net? They have no choice but to listen if they read your blog. What will the blog do? Complain in the blog, yell, scream, curse, act out your anger in it. It can be very stress-relieving after a difficult day.

I also believe that people start blogs so that they can just put themselves out there. It’s as if they want everyone to see them, which Dvorak describes as “a societal need to share.” They create a blog, and expose themselves by sharing personal things whether they be life crises, good things that happened to them, people they are attracted to, or even small things such as the sore they got on their leg a week ago. They show the world who they are for different reasons, maybe wanting a small amount of recognition or for whatever reason.

These are the reasons for blogging that I find most persuasive by Dvorak. They seem to deal more so with people expressing themselves than with anything else, and expression, I believe, is the reason why most people write blogs in the first place. It is their diary. These are the most important reasons that I think Dvorak gave for blogging.

Ch. 2 Pg. 45-65: Thoughts

In the critical reading chapter, I found and learned many useful tips that I did not know, which will help me in the future. Although I knew already what writing to inform, to persuade, and to entertain dealt with, I did not know the depth to which each of these topics influenced my papers and other written works. In this chapter, I learned better ways in which I can inform readers of the subjects of my works, as well as the different ways in which you can write to entertain; not every entertaining piece has to make you laugh. I also learned how to evaluate informative writing which, I feel, will help me in self-evaluation. This will help me to be a better writer in the future regardless of where I write or what I write about.

One thing in this chapter that particularly caught my interest was the writing to persuade portion. I love trying to persuade people to change their viewpoints on debatable issues, especially if they deal with topics such as religion and politics. I even love listening to debates on these issues on the news, radio or wherever else they may be. I enjoyed learning new strategies to effectively deliver my arguments in writing when I need to write to persuade.

One argument, the Ad Hominem argument, was an argument that I have not heard of. I do believe that it is a good strategy for persuading people through your writing to be on your side vs. another person's. This one is especially good in politics. What better way to turn a person's beliefs against an opponent than to make your opponent out to be a liar or hypocrite (sort of like in many presidential elections)?

I also learned that in critiques, you have much opportunity to criticize others work, as well as learn for yourself. If I read an article, I could critique that article to determine its accuracy, importance, and how well the argument was presented. If I find many mistakes in an author's work, such as spelling errors, unimportant information, rambling off topic, difficult-to-understand argument deliverance, or lack of evidence and foundation in his argument, I can use that when I write so that I won't make the same mistakes that he did. Even more so, If I happened to be debating with this author, I could use his mistakes to my advantage by writing in clarity and sharpness, which could sway an audience to my point of view. These things could possibly even determine a winner or loser of an argument.

One final thing that I thought of while reading this chapter was: "What if I could combine writing motives? Perhaps I could mix two together and write to persuade, but in an entertaining way? That would be sort of like advertisement. Just like how on TV they will, for example, show a commercial that would make you laugh (such as a Geico commercial) to persuade you to buy their product, but while entertaining you the whole time. In writing, I could do the same things. I could write on a thing or idea I am trying to offer to the reader, but be possibly comical or use some other entertaining strategies to persuade them to see things my way.

These are my thoughts on this chapter.