FLASH MOB

After reading the Smart Mob article and discussing the relatively new phenomenon in class today, all I could think about was

A) Re-reading the book mentioned in class called The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference by Malcolm Gladwell and

B) The very similar term "Flash Mob" that I have been hearing about in my local news for the past few years.

First of all, Malcolm Gladwell is a great writer and has a lot of well-crafted, knowledgeable things to say about a wide variety topics. He has been a writer for the New Yorker for over a decade, written a many successful non-fiction books and was named as one of TIME Magazine's 100 Most Influential People in 2005.

My favorite Gladwell work is a book called Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking. If you ever want to learn about "gut-feelings" and split-second decisions (and why they are correct) I recommend you check it out. Fairly quick and easy read that can really open your mind up to intuition.

Here is one way to quickly and broadly summarize how The Tipping Point relates to social networking and smart mob's from a fellow Blogger's site:

 

Source: http://darmano.typepad.com/logic_emotion/2006/07/visualizing_the.html

My real interest in this expansive topic of social networking, connectivity and technology is the concept (and practice) of Flash Mobs. In the past two years the City of Philadelphia has experienced a number of flash mob instances and from what I understand they are essentially identical as smart mob's, only these mobs have turned violent. 

Being from the Philadelphia area and frequenting Center City regularly, to hear about hundreds, even thousands, of teenagers flooding the streets at the same time randomly can be kind of disconcerting. 

Why are they here? How did this start? What are they going to do?

Whether innocently started for excitement or callously concocted for crime, these mobs have shown up and turned the streets into mayhem.

2008

On one hand you have a seemingly peaceful attempt at an impromptu World Series Parade:




But in this next video, things turn into break-ins and rioting:





Obviously social networking can be used for crime but these flash mobs in Philly (and other cities in the United States and abroad) truly show both the power of social networking and the inevitable dangers new technology poses for society.

This next video is a news report explaining the situation in more detail. It reaches for answers as to why these mobs exist. This situation brings up countless speculations and inquiries about the smart/flash mob subject.




For the sake of blog post brevity, I'll save my personal opinions for a later date and please let me know what you think.


I'd now like to revive your outlook on smart mobs before I sign off. They can be clever, meaningful, or just really funny.


FLASH FREEZE





FLASH NINJA

Group Projects: The Incentive

I have worked on so many group projects in my academic career that they have become quite the norm. I still dislike them and often dread having to pick partners, figure out meeting times, and allocate workloads.

That being said, ever since middle school I have understood the importance of being able to get along with people, if only for the short time the group is together. It is a practical life skill and can really make things go smoother.

My favorite part about the group project model is when teachers give essentially two grades, an individual part and a group part. This is the incentive that really encourages every group member to contribute to the project to the best of their ability.

By holding members personally responsible for the work they were delegated, and implementing a "grade your group members" part of the project, the 'slacker' mentality is largely weeded out. I'm not sure when teachers started grading projects this way but I'm glad they did. Accountability is such an important trait that we should be making sure it is rewarded.

Metaphysical Rhetoric

Was it just me or did today’s class start to feel like a 300-level Philosophy class? Personally, I enjoyed the subject a lot because individual perception and personal interpretation are two topics that continually blow my mind. I love how EVERYONE sees, feels, reads, and rationalizes EVERYTHING differently. I know there are some “absolutes” and in conversation we tend to agree with each other on a variety of things but I believe we never truly understand exactly what the other person is thinking. There are too many nuances and too many signals where we can differ, too much background and situational knowledge to consider. This isn’t a bad thing and often it isn’t enough to cause a problem because most of the time it goes unnoticed.


In the case of technical writing however, we all read into things differently and come up with differing ideas of what they mean. Today’s article by Carolyn Miller theorized about the difference between scientific logic and fact and the message the writing portrays. When it comes down to it, most scientific expression is based on “scientists” (in the loosed possible sense) trying to come up with a concise way to represent the facts to the audience, whoever it may be. And even if it is their peers or the average public, neither was there to witness the discoveries and no one will inherently know how the scientist felt. There is a disconnection between what happens and how we explain it, and that missing piece is the failure of words to satisfy the need.


I think one of the things Miller was getting at, as outlined at the end of the article, is that technical writing doesn’t need to be an exact science and but rather a device to bring the audience (whoever cares about what is being written) together. It creates a community or culture around a subject and can be discussed as it is interpreted by individuals as to what the meaning truly is about.

Catering to the Audience

     I completely forgot to write a Blog post last week so I have had the opportunity to read a number of my classmates entries in catching up after the weekend. Writing Instructions seems to be the popular topic and rightfully so. This is our first real assignment in this class and although it seemed like an easy one at the start I am starting to change my mind. It seems we are all gaining a new appreciation for the little booklets that come with our purchases, trying their best to make sense in the heads of every random buyer of the product or service.
     The more specific the topic, i think, the easier it is to write instructions for something because your audience is highly specialized and therefore easier to cater to. I think the real difficulty arises in trying to  write instructions for the general public, anyone. We all interpret things differently and I think that pays a huge role in our perception of instructions. Some love the all visual Ikea ones and some despise them, some need warnings and hints and explanations while others just want the bare facts. As we continue our assignment process, I think it is great we have a chance to go over our work with our group and get feedback. This way we can see how others interpret our work and gives us an idea of how to cater more towards the audience.

 Random Question

What do you think would be the hardest thing to write general instructions for?
I'm going with Jury Duty

Exisitential Exigence

     Ever spend time thinking about those major life challenges that question your existence? Why are we here? Is there really a God? What is our purpose in life? No? Well good for you lucky few. These issues may seem lofty and impossible but they do provide an obstacle that you want to overcome or a problem you want to solve.

     In Bitzer's "The Rhetorical Situation," the concept of thinking in 3's continues with a new concept of rhetoric. The article breaks it down into three parts: exigence, audience and constraints. Exigence refers to an observable issue that needs resolution, providing a subject matter for the rhetorical situation. It is also closely related to how I view a part of the idea of existentialism, but more on that in a minute. The second part of the rhetorical situation is audience, meaning the rhetorical discourse needs to be directed toward someone in a convincing manner. Also I think it is important to note that this audience should be capable of either making the change or at least passing along the message to others. This gives the rhetoric direction and action. The third part are constraints because without something or someone standing in the way, rhetoric would probably fall flat and become meaning less. If everyone agreed on every issue there may well be an audience but who cares? There is nothing to argue.

     Existentialism takes into account a lot of different ideas and beliefs about the world but what I am interested in is the resolution of issues that rhetoric takes on. This broad belief system, in part, focuses on free will and how life isn't rational. Rhetoricians may be trying to persuade or enlighten a group of people who simple won't listen/understand/care about what is being said. Think about our political system and how people may make their voting decisions. I know plenty of people who vote for candidates based on a number of things unrelated to what they say. Do you think everyone who votes watches the debates, researches the issues, and is swayed by the political rhetoric throughout the campaign period? My point is no one knows how rhetoric will affect society, or individuals, if even at all; but overcoming obstacles, and searching for answers, is an essential part of the rhetorical situation. Without it, we are preaching to an audience without a point.

And in relation to the Mosque controversy, here is an article I stumbled upon "proving" (and I use this term with the utmost sarcasm) that there are people out there very, very easily swayed by the rhetoric (enthymenes) missing important premises:

http://www.theonion.com/articles/man-already-knows-everything-he-needs-to-know-abou,17990/

Rhetoric: Necessary Evil

     After reading Herrick's piece about rhetoric, I feel like I don't view this form of writing any differently, only with a little more empathy. He brought up lots of examples proving that we use persuasion in almost every part of our lives: business, music, love, etc. Prior to Monday, I reserved persuasion for essays in English class and political debates, both inherently evil enterprises, but now I see how persuasion can exist everywhere and don't know where we would be without it. Rhetoric, in the sense of Athenian decisions on war or twisting the truth in "Thank You For Smoking", is just one way of looking at the genre.

I particularly liked the definition that characterized rhetoric as

"Achieving clarity through structure"
and
"Sense of beauty through aesthetics"

I think it casts rhetoric in a different light, a light that makes it seem both technical (clarity and structure) and persuasive (beauty and aesthetics).