Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Journal 5: Due Wednesday July 15
Think about visual/textual relationships on webpages. Find an article related to your topic and critique the webpage for its content, its graphic layout, and its reliability. Do not use Wikipedia, a dictionary, an encyclopedia, or imdb.com. Is it an accurate depiction or can webpages be misleading? How do color, pictures, layout design, and text all work together to create an image about the topic you are dealing with? Post the webpage you are analyzing along with the journal entry. Also, consider how words an images differ rhetorically. Can we accomplish different goals through the use of video, still images, audio, and words that we may not be able to accomplish by words alone? When is it appropriate to choose one medium over another? In other words, can an image do something rhetorically that a word cannot, and it what situations are words more appropriate than an image?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/allstar09/columns/story?columnist=crasnick_jerry&id=4325660
ReplyDeleteI chose an article from ESPN, about the 2009 MLB All Star Game. At the top of the article is a video clip of sports broadcasters talking about the up coming All Star Game. This helps supplement the article below it, which also describes the upcoming game. Although the author of the article is a legit sports writer some of the issues he presents in the article are of his own opinion. There is also two images within the article, one of the MLB commissioner Bud Selig and the other of a former All Star form the Texas Rangers, Michael Young. The picture of Bud helps depict the story he is telling in the article about the changes the commissioner made to the All Star following the 2002 showing. The picture of Young shows him after he drove home the game winning run in last years All Star game. These pictures do a great job of illustrating the very issues the author is depicting in the piece. These video can be more easily understandable than the long drawn out article even though they both basically say the same thing. But the words describing the changes made by the commissioner and the atmosphere of the ball park after Young's game winning hit are a much better indication than the two still frames.
My bad for some reason i can not post an entry. Zak Yogel.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.pbs.org/battlefieldvietnam/
ReplyDeleteI chose the PBS website to learn about my topic, the Vietnam War. This website seems very useful and quite reliable. I know this because a lot of the facts are accurate and this is a .org website, letting me know that this is an organization that is not in it for the money. Instead this website is based around a non-profit organization, thats only goal is to help other people become more educated about certain things. This website also gives a brief run down on how the countries are now and how they were before the fighting broke out. Also there are photographs that help present information to the readers. I feel that this is a very effective way to distribute information, but in my opinion, video is by far the best medium. I feel that video is a perfect replica of the actual event. Would you rather see a picture about the war or a video of the actual war?--------Brad Baker
http://www.america.gov/st/usg-english/2008/August/20080801181504lcnirellep0.1261713.html
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how pork barrel spending became a key issue in 2008 prediential race. The article I feel could stand out visually more. The title is not very big and not a lot of colors are used. There are two pictures in the article, one is of San Antoino's river walk, which the author uses as an example of pork barrel spending. The other picture is of a large pig that someone built in protest of spending. The river walk picture I feel has nothing to do with the article and needs to be taken out. This article is defining what Pork Barrel spending is and then going on to say how the canidates for president feel about it. They need to include a picture of John McCain or Barack Obama, espicially because this article was written months before the election and The election itself was the hottest issue of that time, not pork barrel spending.
Yes you can absolutly accomplish different goals by including images. Images can definatly pursuade people more than words in certain situations. Im doing my reasearch paper on a political ad, and the images are much more stronger than the words themselves. the words are basically jsut things that McCain and Palin have done in the past. The images though show them as powerful individuals that look like they are going to change the world.
I feel that if you want to appeal to ethos, you should include images. Showing a picture of poor people in other parts of the globe has a greater effect than just describing their situation. If you want to apply to Logos, words seem to be the better optition. For example in a speech or debate, you are trying to use logic to get your point accross. To appeal to pathos you can use either audio or visual. those are just my ideas / generalizations on when to use the 3 appeals