Jeff Swift
Posts
April 20, 04:08 PM
Traditional rhetoric was a strategic venture in persuasion, featuring a rhetor consciously making arguments in rhetorical situations to a particular group of people. Ideas of identification and attitude (Burke), individuals and societies (Dewey), and rhetoric and dialectic (Plato, Aristotle, Kasteley), have helped me understand a new way of looking at rhetoric, exemplified in my own life in regards to politics and Facebook.
I do a lot of reading about politics—I thoroughly enjoy the back-and-forth that constitutes my mixed list of opinion and news sources. When I find a particularly compelling argument, I often post a link to that argument on Facebook (or another similar social site). Most of the time I’m not even sure who’s reading the stuff I post, and there’s really no way to tell. But, my justification for doing this comes from a new realization I had while studying this past semester, and that realization boils down to the the difference between kinetic rhetoric and potential rhetoric.
Kinetic energy is exhibited when a paint can falls and splatters all over the floor. Kinetic energy is expended to get an object moving now. Kinetic persuasion, then, is the focus of traditional—or, as Burke would call it, “old”—rhetoric (“Rhetoric Old and New”), the kind where a single rhetor marshals the available means of persuasion, stands up in front of an audience, and works to change minds the moment his argument is heard.
Potential energy is a different story, a story I learned partly through Burke’s explanation of art as primarily based on experience (Counter-statement 77). Where kinetic energy puts a paint can on a ladder, potential energy promises future energy stored in that paint can. In order to increase potential energy, one must simply move the paint bucket higher up on the ladder. The same is true for rhetoric: potential persuasion is the kind that is more focused on networks and relationships—what Burke often calls “identification” (“Responsibilities of National Greatness” 37)—and less focused on winning hearts and minds. Potential rhetoricians, then, are more engaged in the art of small talk than the art of argumentation. They know that, in order to be persuasive in the future, they must focus on relationships now. They understand exactly what Burke and Dewey understood: while bullet points and tropes are rhetorically effective, some persuasion is more about bringing people together and uniting around common values.
Because of this understanding, and as I have come to value the work of aesthetic theorists like Burke and Dewey, I value communication and interactions like my political postings on Facebook: rhetorical in nature but not in purpose. These posts can unify people and help them bond in meaningful ways. I can greatly increase my persuasive energy as I build these relationships and bonds—as I move the paint bucket higher and higher on the ladder. Eventually, when the time is right, I’ll make some kinetic argument that will push the bucket off the ladder. True potential rhetoric is not strategic, though: its highest power comes from building true relationships without strategically plotting at all. Potential rhetoric is more about the network than the agenda.
Works Cited:
Burke, Kenneth. Counter-Statement. University of California Press, 1968. Print.
—. “Responsibilities of National Greatness.” The Nation 1967: 46-50.
—. “Rhetoric–Old and New.” Journal of General Education V.April (1951): 203-209.
February 18, 04:29 PM
In Phaedrus, Plato demonstrates a surprisingly Burkean philosophy of rhetoric. Kenneth Burke believes that poetic rhetoric derives power from the identification it creates, the effects of shared experiences that come through a focus on creating a common experience rather than a polemical or persuasive artifact. Plato never mentioned the term “poetic rhetoric,” but indirectly discussed the concept in depth.
For example, one of Plato’s strongest critiques of rhetoric is aimed at rhetoricians who focus solely on onetime persuasive speechmaking. Plato claims that rhetoric is more powerful when rhetoric is viewed as part of the ongoing give-and-take of dialectic:
The reason they cannot define rhetoric is that they are ignorant of dialectic. It is their ignorance that makes them think they have discovered what rhetoric is when they have mastered only what is necessary to learn as preliminaries. So they teach these preliminaries and imagine their pupils have received a full course in rhetoric. (69-70)
These preliminaries, referred to by Plato as “methods” (65) and “techniques” (69), roughly equate to what Burke would refer to as “old rhetoric,” the bare bones of persuasive speechmaking. Burke and Plato disagree with those, like Lysias, who seem to think that these forms are enough, that speeches should be focused on figures of speech rather than context and discourse.
Plato argues that rhetoric is more powerful when the words are crafted by rhetors “standing in front of” their audience (74) able to engage in back-and-forth “in their own defense” (82). This experiential addition to rhetoric, the necessary addition to the bare bones of rhetoric, is known to Burke as identification; to Plato as dialectic. Plato’s dialectic requires a persuasive strategy which requires immediate response and discussion—a much more experiential type of persuasion than the passive one-to-many type taught by Aristotle as a way to move large audiences. For Plato, the elements of rhetoric are still important and useful, but only when used between parties who are able to examine motives and question assertions. This real-time critical analysis that sets Lysias apart from Socrates—Lysias would make strategic assertions at people, Socrates would discuss issues with people. Co-argumentation, this polishing of ideas in an informed and engaged discussion, requires that both sides allow themselves to be influenced through genuinely listening and applying opponents’ ideas to their own.
Through this opening to influence and applying opposing ideas, Plato’s dialecticians engage in an experience that requires all parties to be present and involved. If someone is passively listening—if they don’t engage in the experience—the dialectical debate loses their input and criticism. It is only as all present parties engage that the experience can meet its full dialectical potential.
Socrates grants the best rhetoricians the ability to live up to his most respected position: Nehamas suggests that “The knowledge Socrates attributes to the true rhetorician . . . is at least in part the knowledge he has earlier attributed to the dialectician or philosopher” (xli). Plato’s true rhetorician is able to combine the elements of dialectical experiences—elements that approach arguments as ongoing experiences rather than isolated statements of truth—with the polished methods and techniques of Lysias’ rhetoric.
This combination, “forever immortal” in Plato’s eyes (83), is the highest form of persuasion. This kind of rhetoric leads the speaker and the audience together toward better understanding. An understanding of this principle, Plato asserts, is how truly successful rhetoricians become successful: “Then, and only then, will you be able to use speech artfully” (83).
All quotes come from Alexander Nehamas’ translation of Phaedrus.
January 27, 12:20 PM
Kenneth Burke is prophetic in his critique of technology, foreseeing the dominance and prominence of technology in our culture long before the modern personal computer was even a twinkle in Steve Jobs’ eye. Burke gives three suggestions to help us deal with the all-powerful force of the cutting edge: first, live with the vices and learn from the virtues; second, establish a habit of thoughtful reflective deliberation; third, embrace inefficiency.
Burke’s critique of the obsession with technological vices is tempered by his argument that “society is sound only if it can prosper on its vices, since virtues are by very definition rare and exceptional” (114). In learning to live with the tech-vice majority we should listen to the rare and exceptional users of technology, the ones who have maximized the virtues of our technology. We should keep our eyes out for uses of technology that stimulate discussion, build communities, and establish meaningful relationships. Such endeavors merit more attention than those that create echo chambers, promote narcissism, or craft illusions of real interactions.
Burke suggests that thoughtful deliberation can be a powerful tool in controlling the vice of technology, a tool that has proven efficient at harnessing another potentially devastating force: government. Part of the reason our government works so well is because it doesn’t—it often takes months of bureaucratic squabbling for a president to do something as simple as declare war, a fact kings of the past would laugh at for its absurdity. Yet, it’s that same squabbling and longwinded debate that keeps the democracy in line, Kenneth Burke argues. Democracy is a successful blend of “organized distrust, ‘protest made easy,’ a babble of discordant voices, a colossal getting in one’s own way” (114). This engaged and somewhat inefficient discourse keeps our elected leadership on track and working. Like government, technology requires a constant reflective voice to control and guide it. Only through constant reflection and debate can vices as potentially ruinous as government or technology be harnessed for the good of society. Only as we consciously employ an “organized distrust” of technology will it ever be as productive as Burke’s vision of American democracy.
So what principles should guide the babble of discordant voices that would harness the power of technology? Burke suggests that inefficiency should be one such guiding principle, that the opposite is little more than an end-unto-itself: “efficiency breeds but the necessity of more efficiency” (120). Burke worries that when we focus our efforts on making life easier we inevitably create more problems that then require new inventions to make life easier. Each technology creates problems that future technologies will need to “fix,” bringing with them more problems. Eventually, this spiral results in a very complex, highly sensitive web of fixes and counter-fixes (120). As we analyze our technology, then, we must remember that inefficiency is sometimes needed to “prevent the machine from becoming too imperious and forcing us into social complexities which require exceptional delicacy of adjustment” (120-21).
In technology as in government, our chance to harness the power of our vices rests on the shoulders of individuals. We must take initiative and act on Burke’s suggestions in order to keep the vices from overrunning the virtues. Such actions could seem counterproductive, but really they shift the focus from the efficient and the easy to the pragmatic and the possible. Such a shift is based on the powerful underlying notion that “the criterion of ‘usefulness’ has enjoyed much more prestige than its underlying logic merited” (90). A paradigm shift of this magnitude, in Burke’s eyes, might actually succeed in channeling the rushing tide of progress.
All quotes taken from Burke’s Counter-statement.
January 13, 11:29 PM
The Vatican came out recently against what they perceive as Avatar‘s attack on religion. As they see it, Avatar preaches a gospel of nature rather than God, of naturalism rather than theism. I’ve heard this criticism echoed as a broader critique of environmentalist policies and general beliefs about caring for and preserving the environment.
I agree that, when taken too far, reverence for nature can distort or supplant traditional worship of God. But it doesn’t necessarily have to. In fact, many religious environmentalists have managed to balance belief in God and protectiveness for God’s creations.
I’ll be the first to admit Avatar can be overly preachy at time. It is clearly advocating a number of agendas at the same time, one of which is environmentalism. But, just because someone or something is pro-environment does not mean they are somehow anti-God or anti-religion. Maybe their environmentalism is supplanting some other obsession.
In my opinion, Avatar is not replacing the God of religion with the god of nature, but is instead putting the god of nature above the god of money. Avatar‘s environmental message is not that we should stop worshiping the God of the Bible, but that we should reconsider our obsession with financial gain ignorant of the world around us.
Maybe the god of profit doesn’t always justify abuse of the creations we’re here to defend as stewards.
December 30, 08:27 AM
There’s no doubt that presidential candidate Barack Obama did more to advance politicians’ use of social media than any other candidate in the 2008 election. Obama built on Howard Dean’s revolutionary 2004 campaign, which took advantage of social media to build a following, organize activists, and ultimately connect with potential voters. Scholars across academic boundaries are uniting around the banner of social media with the hope that they will be able to connect with their students on the level that politicians like Barack Obama were able to connect with potential voters. President Obama’s huge success with the youth vote in the 2008 elections suggests that following his example might teach us a thing or two about connecting with our students.
Teachers of writing and composition have particularly interesting things to learn from this shift toward the digital. Andrea Lunsford recently did a study of the writing habits of young people. She found that young people write more than ever, and that a striking percentage of that writing happens online. As teachers of writing, we have a choice to make. We can instruct students solely based on the traditional page, or we can teach writing where our students are actually writing: online. We can help our students do high-quality writing and research in the digital sphere, making them better writers where they write in their personal and professional lives as well as their educational lives. Just as President Obama has taken advantage of Twitter as a medium to create connections between followers and a cause, teachers can use Twitter to create connections between students and a subject.
While Internet newcomer Twitter has been embraced as a breakthrough in social media and mass communication, and Facebook has revolutionized the way millions of users experience the Internet, neither has been studied as an example of a medium for successful rhetorical argumentation. Scholars are becoming more interested in “microblogging” as a medium, but have yet to analyze the pedagogical implications in these capsules of prose. In this presentation, I will first briefly introduce Twitter as a writer’s medium, after which I will discuss three types of rhetorical identification that Twitter allows students to create: with the teacher, with peers in the class, and with experts in their field. I will also suggest possible pedagogical applications related to each type of identification, built specifically to forge these relationships.
The accompanying “Prezi” presentation can be found here.
December 29, 09:57 PM
Below are listed a number of possible Twitter-based activities and assignments that can help students and teachers connect in new ways (or old ways using new media).
For an opinion piece:
The teacher tweets a question, something like: “What do you enjoy reading?” This kind of discussion helps students see that their teacher cares about their opinions (making them more willing to share those opinions in a graded setting) while allowing the teacher and the student to interact in an ungraded experience outside class.
For an analysis piece:
The teacher posts her favorite line of the piece on Twitter, inviting the other students to do the same. Students will come to respect the instructor’s expertise as it is made available.
For a researched position:
Tweet three different sides to your argument. This will give the teacher the opportunity to respond in a non-threatening and very informative way to one of the most important concepts in a research assignment. The students will get these small comments and know that the teacher has put forth effort reading their work and formulating a response to it.
For a multimodal composition:
Tweet a link to your favorite webpage. Comment on the way the page is organized. The instructor, again, gains credibility through reading and commenting on students’ personal opinions.
In summary, instructors will be able to connect with their students as they comment regularly on students’ small and low-key opinions and assignments. Teachers will create an ambient scholarly buzz that will help the students feel connected to the class discussions and readings.
With their Peers
Some might wonder why Twitter is better at creating rhetorical identification than non-microblogging forms such as whiteboards, emails, class discussions, etc. The key comes in this element of phatic communication: the classroom will be augmented with an ambient buzz of scholarly discussion, collaboration, and commenting. Students will be more connected as they interact in such a proprioception-oriented manner.
For an opinion piece:
Write your first paragraph. Now condense that down into a sentence. Now condense that down into a tweet. Now post. Read and comment on 3 other argument sentences. This exercise helps students find the essence of their paper, which helps them focus their future drafts. It also gives students the opportunity to communicate “phatic-ly” with each other, to comment on others’ efforts and identify with their opinions.
Post a link to a digital draft of your paper, along with a short description. Now go read two other papers and write comments. As students read their peers’ extended arguments, they will become more invested in the success of their peers.
For an analysis piece:
Find an article that uses irony. Tweet the link and comment on whether you think the irony worked or didn’t work for the intended audience. Read three other tweets and comment on their analysis. This will fulfill the twofold purpose of helping the students develop a critical eye for audience awareness while at the same time helping them get to know each other and express themselves in phatic-based discussion.
Find an article whose audience is tree-huggers. Tweet the link. Respond to whether you are a part of that audience. Read and comment on peers’ tweets. This assignment helps students learn to pick out audiences while at the same time giving them the chance to identify with other audiences. Students will get to know each other by reading and discussing peers’ analysis and statements of belief.
For a researched position:
Condense your argument down to 140 characters and post it to Twitter. Now respond to another student’s argument with a question. As students engage in this short-and-sweet peer-review session they will learn principles of analysis and coordination.
Find other members of the class who are researching similar topics. Tweet links relevant to all your papers. This example of scholarly proprioception will help students learn to engage in a scholarly community and share the load of research.
For a multimodal composition:
Tweet a response to at least three peers’ profile pictures on Twitter. Does their picture capture them as people? Tweet any suggestions. Many students love pictures, and inviting them to look at their friends’ pictures with a rhetorically critical eye will help them learn the principles, get to know their peers better, and grow closer together as a class.
In summary, as students share blips of informed thought with each other, they will begin to get a feel for how their peers think about the class’s readings and discussions. This understanding will help them feel comfortable to engage in peer reviews, to share research, and to discuss class readings.
With Experts
If Twitter is so effective in passing links, is it equally as effective in helping students engage in a back-and-forth with experts in their fields? I believe it is, and here are a few examples of how that can come about:
For an opinion piece:
Read at least two other op-eds on your issue and tweet the more powerful along with why it’s the more powerful. Not only will students read up on their issue, but they will engage in the thoughtful discussion on the issue. This will help establish them as investigators of that particular issue, helping them join the topic’s discourse community on Twitter.
Find at least five twitter streams of people who tweet about your issue. Follow them and ask them their favorite source on the matter. This is a wonderful way for students to engage with experts in their field. People are often quite willing to help over Twitter, especially if the student has spent the time to find high-quality Twitter streams.
For an analysis piece:
Tweet a link to your analysis along with the thesis statement. Ask for comments. This will invite the comments of those who agree as well as those who disagree with the student’s analysis, engaging the student in the real debate about the issue. Here are some ways this might happen.
For a researched position:
Find a link to an opinion that disagrees with your own. Post it along with the reason you disagree with the opinion. Students will practice engaging with opposing viewpoints. Twitter’s accessibility means that others—maybe even some who disagree with the student—will be able to read and comment.
For a multimodal composition:
Tweet a link to your completed project. Ask for feedback. It’s amazing how many people are willing to help when contacted through social media. Students might even learn that someone in their network is an expert visual designer.
Find a twitter user who has a webpage you admire. Tweet them and ask how they designed their page. Even if the expert never responds, the students will have found a website whose design they appreciate and spent a few minutes crafting and sending a tweet. If the expert does respond, that’s just icing on the cake.
In summary, students become more active scholars and citizens as they interact in the discourse community they are entering with their writing assignments. They are able to see that their issues really matter to the outside world, and that their assignments are preparing them to interact with experts on their issue. This interaction helps give students the perspective and confidence to actually engage with the experts, rather than summarizing or parroting their arguments.
For the full theoretical discussion of these assignments, see my series of blog posts based on my MLA 2009 presentation, and the accompanying “Prezi” presentation can be found here.
December 29, 06:22 PM
Despite Twitter’s brevity and the popularity of doubting it as a serious medium, Twitter allows for complex communication and pedagogical application that makes use of rhetorical identification and persuasion. This power is a compelling reason for teachers to consider social media as a veritable force in the classroom. We should learn from the model of the traditional newspapers: part of the reason they are losing business now is their reticence to move online and learn the new system the Internet makes possible. If we as teachers don’t at least consider new media, we’ll wake up one day to find that we have lost our monopoly on teaching writing. Someone else will have moved in and made us obsolete.
While I believe in letting students take charge of their own education, students won’t invest themselves in Twitter unless they see its usefulness and power. And they will never see its usefulness or power unless we guide them. This is our call as teachers: help our students learn to read and write as they take their scholarship to the next level of digital engagement.
The accompanying “Prezi” presentation can be found here.
Works Cited/Referenced
James S. Baumlin “Ethos” Encyclopedia of Rhetoric. Ed. Thomas O. Sloane. © 2006 Oxford
UP. Encyclopedia of Rhetoric: (e-reference edition). Oxford University Press. Brigham Young University (BYU). Web. 28 October 2009
Bitzer, Lloyd. “The Rhetorical Situation.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 1 (1968): 1-14.
Print.
Burke, Kenneth. A Rhetoric of Motives. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1969. Print.
Consigny, Scott. “Rhetoric and Its Situations.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 7.3 (1974): 175-86. Print.
Dewey, John. The Public and its Problems. Chicago: Gateway, 1946. Print.
Godin, Seth. Unleashing the Ideavirus. New York: Hyperion, 2001. Print.
Hauser, Gerald A. Introduction to Rhetorical Theory. 2nd ed. Prospect Heights:
Waveland Press, 2002. Print.
Haven, Cynthia. “Stanford study finds richness and complexity in students’ writing.” Stanford University News 12 Oct 2009. Web. 16 Dec 2009.
Jakobson, Roman. “Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics.” Style In Language.
Ed. Thomas Sebeok. Cambridge: MIT, 1960. Print.
Johnson, Steven. “How Twitter Will Change the Way We Live.” Time 4 Jun 2009. Time.com. Web. 4 Jun 2009.
Lanham, Richard A. The Economics of Attention: Style and Substance in the Age of Information. 1st ed. University Of Chicago Press, 2006. Print.
Levinson, Paul. New New Media. 1st ed. Allyn & Bacon, 2009. Print.
O’Reilly, Tim et al. The Twitter Book. O’Reilly Media, 2009. Print.
Rosen, Jay. “Mindcasting: Defining the Form, Spreading the Meme.” Quote and Comment 19 May 2009. Web. 17 Nov 2009.
“Social Isolation and New Technology.” Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life Project 4 Nov 2009. Web. 30 Nov 2009.
“Stanford Study of Writing – Home.” Stanford Study of Writing. Web. 30 Nov 2009.
Stross, Randall. “Hey, Just a Minute (or Why Google Isn’t Twitter).” The New York Times 14 Jun 2009. NYTimes.com. Web. 30 Nov 2009.
Surowiecki, James. The Wisdom of Crowds. New York: Anchor, 2005. Print.
December 29, 08:25 AM
Writing instructors shouldn’t underestimate the power of Twitter to engage students in the content of the course. It is important to note that Twitter is not just a service for prioritizing Twitter information, but a tool to organize the information of the Internet as a whole. This comes from what venture capitalist and Twitter investor Fred Wilson calls “the power of the passed link” (Schonfeld). Using Twitter’s powerful system, essentially a system of digital road signs, savvy tweeters are able to discover and propagate influential and interesting ideas by passing links and using others’ suggestions as a way to navigate the information highway. This passing of content from one context to another fits into Barbara Warnick’s claim that “electronic media content has become rife with intertextuality” (93). Warnick suggests the hyperlink, one of the most intertextual elements found on Twitter, as an example of digital intertextuality (94). The hyperlink allows ideas to begin on a blog or website (Warnick’s digital intertextuality) and then spread to—and through—Twitter.
This is where “following” the right people on Twitter turns out to be invaluable: if a student is writing about politics, for example, she will follow—and receive tweets from—individuals who tweet about politics, often those in her region. Eventually, she will learn who are the most influential and the most well connected, and add to or subtract from the group of people she follows. In a short amount of time, that list of followers will become more helpful to her than the local paper or the blogosphere, precisely because they will pass on their own timely experiences as well as up-to-the-minute useful links to relevant information from all over the web. The simplicity and directness of these passed links, along with individuals’ commentary and personal experiences, combine to give the Twitter reader a very powerful supplement to traditional means of getting information. Twitter doesn’t always supplant traditional media; it supplements them through the referral system of passed links.
Sample Twitter applications
If Twitter is so effective in passing links, is it equally as effective in helping students engage in a back-and-forth with experts in their fields? I believe it is, and here are a few examples of how that can come about:
For an opinion piece:
Read at least two other op-eds on your issue and tweet the more powerful along with why it’s the more powerful. Not only will students read up on their issue, but they will engage in the thoughtful discussion on the issue. This will help establish them as investigators of that particular issue, helping them join the topic’s discourse community on Twitter.
Find at least five twitter streams of people who tweet about your issue. Follow them and ask them their favorite source on the matter. This is a wonderful way for students to engage with experts in their field. People are often quite willing to help over Twitter, especially if the student has spent the time to find high-quality Twitter streams.
For an analysis piece:
Tweet a link to your analysis along with the thesis statement. Ask for comments. This will invite the comments of those who agree as well as those who disagree with the student’s analysis, engaging the student in the real debate about the issue. Here are some ways this might happen.
For a researched position:
Find a link to an opinion that disagrees with your own. Post it along with the reason you disagree with the opinion. Students will practice engaging with opposing viewpoints. Twitter’s accessibility means that others—maybe even some who disagree with the student—will be able to read and comment.
For a multimodal composition:
Tweet a link to your completed project. Ask for feedback. It’s amazing how many people are willing to help when contacted through social media. Students might even learn that someone in their network is an expert visual designer.
Find a twitter user who has a webpage you admire. Tweet them and ask how they designed their page. Even if the expert never responds, the students will have found a website whose design they appreciate and spent a few minutes crafting and sending a tweet. If the expert does respond, that’s just icing on the cake.
See also how Twitter can be used to create connections with the teacher and with peers in the class.
See also how Twitter can be used to create connections with the teacher and with peers in the class.
In summary, students become more active scholars and citizens as they interact in the discourse community they are entering with their writing assignments. They are able to see that their issues really matter to the outside world, and that their assignments are preparing them to interact with experts on their issue. This interaction helps give students the perspective and confidence to actually engage with the experts, rather than summarizing or parroting their arguments.
December 29, 08:25 AM
The connection with peers will come largely in the form of “phatic communication,” a concept first described in the 1900s by Bronisław Malinowski and expounded upon by linguist Roman Jakobson. Also called “ambient awareness” by technology writer Clive Thompson (Johnson 1), this is the type of communication that exists to perform social roles rather than to transmit information. An example of phatic communication is the casual question “how are you doing?”: the questioner does not really want to hear an information-packed response, but asks in order to maintain the friendship and initiate communication. Other examples of phatic communication would be “How was your weekend?” “How about that game last night?” “What are you up to these days?” or “Do you have any big plans for the holidays?” As soon as the conversation moves toward more information-based queries (What are you researching? Did you see that debate last night? Are you coming to my party this week?), the communication has left the realm of the phatic.
Twitter is an ideal medium for phatic communication—in fact, one of the biggest criticisms of Twitter (I don’t care what you had for lunch, or what color your new fridge is, or what you think about last night’s TV show) deals with the abundance of tweets that are purely phatic (such as those that focus on lunch menus, appliance colors, and musings about “The Biggest Loser”). Much of everyday communication, according to Jakobson, includes some element of the phatic function of language. While Twitter publicizes such communication more broadly, it is still following the general rules of phatic communication. Some tweets seem to have no bearing on any particular rhetorical situation, but they are in fact playing key roles in the very communication that can profoundly influence rhetorical situations by keeping the channels open. Not all tweets are phatic in nature—while Twitter updates often include comments about banal observations and content-less blather, there are also significant numbers of more content-laden tweets.
This combination of phatic and information-based communication means that rhetors are able to share their lives in a way previously impossible. One information science expert explains that these microblogging experiences are quite powerful in the aggregate: “Merely looking at a stranger’s Twitter or Facebook feed isn’t interesting, because it seems like blather. Follow it for a day, though, and it begins to feel like a short story; follow it for a month, and it’s a novel[12]” (Thompson, “Brave New World of Digital Intimacy”).
These relationships also give rhetors a significant power that previously was very difficult to cultivate. Phatic communication keeps the channels of communication open so that when something significant happens, and substantive communication is needed, the channels are already established. This web of connections acts much like a power grid. The power lines are set up and ready to go—sometimes only using a percentage of the carrying capacity of the lines—so that when something substantive comes along the grid is ready to facilitate transmission to the appropriate parties. The web of power lines is comparable to the foundation of phatic communication—the circle of regular contacts, of people whose breakfast choices I might have read about. When something important happens, I send my current through the already-established web, and suddenly I move from phatic to more substantive communication. This phatic web makes substantive-laden communication more meaningful: without the web there, the content lacks context. Twitter is only one of many providers of this phatic context, but it is definitely one of the most timely, accessible, and wide-reaching.
This kind of communication proves useful for students for a number of reasons. For example, students feel more comfortable with each other in the classroom, creating a more open and collaborative environment. Students also feel more comfortable with the teacher, helping them be open to asking questions and contributing to the class discussions. Ideally, students will work better together in groups, as they will feel like a team or a group rather than a bunch of people getting credit in the same class at the same time.
Sample Twitter applications
Some might wonder why Twitter is better at creating rhetorical identification than non-microblogging forms such as whiteboards, emails, class discussions, etc. The key comes in this element of phatic communication: the classroom will be augmented with an ambient buzz of scholarly discussion, collaboration, and commenting. Students will be more connected as they interact in such a proprioception-oriented manner.
For an opinion piece:
Write your first paragraph. Now condense that down into a sentence. Now condense that down into a tweet. Now post. Read and comment on 3 other argument sentences. This exercise helps students find the essence of their paper, which helps them focus their future drafts. It also gives students the opportunity to communicate “phatic-ly” with each other, to comment on others’ efforts and identify with their opinions.
Post a link to a digital draft of your paper, along with a short description. Now go read two other papers and write comments. As students read their peers’ extended arguments, they will become more invested in the success of their peers.
For an analysis piece:
Find an article that uses irony. Tweet the link and comment on whether you think the irony worked or didn’t work for the intended audience. Read three other tweets and comment on their analysis. This will fulfill the twofold purpose of helping the students develop a critical eye for audience awareness while at the same time helping them get to know each other and express themselves in phatic-based discussion.
Find an article whose audience is tree-huggers. Tweet the link. Respond to whether you are a part of that audience. Read and comment on peers’ tweets. This assignment helps students learn to pick out audiences while at the same time giving them the chance to identify with other audiences. Students will get to know each other by reading and discussing peers’ analysis and statements of belief.
For a researched position:
Condense your argument down to 140 characters and post it to Twitter. Now respond to another student’s argument with a question. As students engage in this short-and-sweet peer-review session they will learn principles of analysis and coordination.
Find other members of the class who are researching similar topics. Tweet links relevant to all your papers. This example of scholarly proprioception will help students learn to engage in a scholarly community and share the load of research.
For a multimodal composition:
Tweet a response to at least three peers’ profile pictures on Twitter. Does their picture capture them as people? Tweet any suggestions. Many students love pictures, and inviting them to look at their friends’ pictures with a rhetorically critical eye will help them learn the principles, get to know their peers better, and grow closer together as a class.
In summary, as students share blips of informed thought with each other, they will begin to get a feel for how their peers think about the class’s readings and discussions. This understanding will help them feel comfortable to engage in peer reviews, to share research, and to discuss class readings.
See also how Twitter can be used to create connections with the teacher and with experts in their field.
December 29, 08:24 AM
While ethos can be defined quite simply as “the character of the speaker,” rhetoricians have long disagreed over the details. Some argue that character is invented in the text of the speech or artifact, while others hold that character is situated in the past deeds of the rhetor, while others prefer some combination of the two (Baumlin). Kenneth Burke complicated the issue when he combined the concept of ethos with his concept of identification: “you persuade a man only insofar as you can talk his language . . . identifying your ways with his (Burke 55). We gain credibility, in Burke’s understanding, by identifying ourselves with our audience. Twitter provides teachers (and students, for that matter) the opportunity to create their own Twitter ethos, or Tweet “cred,” through mass announcements, discussion questions, and direct messages to students, among others.
Sample Twitter applications
Below are listed a number of possible Twitter-based activities and assignments that can help students and teachers connect in new ways (or old ways using new media).
For an opinion piece:
The teacher tweets a question, something like: “What do you enjoy reading?” This kind of discussion helps students see that their teacher cares about their opinions (making them more willing to share those opinions in a graded setting) while allowing the teacher and the student to interact in an ungraded experience outside class.
For an analysis piece:
The teacher posts her favorite line of the piece on Twitter, inviting the other students to do the same. Students will come to respect the instructor’s expertise as it is made available.
For a researched position:
Tweet three different sides to your argument. This will give the teacher the opportunity to respond in a non-threatening and very informative way to one of the most important concepts in a research assignment. The students will get these small comments and know that the teacher has put forth effort reading their work and formulating a response to it.
For a multimodal composition:
Tweet a link to your favorite webpage. Comment on the way the page is organized. The instructor, again, gains credibility through reading and commenting on students’ personal opinions.
In summary, instructors will be able to connect with their students as they comment regularly on students’ small and low-key opinions and assignments. Teachers will create an ambient scholarly buzz that will help the students feel connected to the class discussions and readings.
See also how Twitter can be used to create connections with peers in the class and with experts in their field.
I'm a PhD student studying in North Carolina State's Communication, Rhetoric, and Digital Media program (CRDM). My interests include political rhetoric, online publics, digital rhetoric, and online pedagogy.
I have experience teaching first year and advanced writing.
