Drones In Journalism

25856_001_0002.jpg
12/15/2015 CNN Public Relations CNN UAV – CNN A.I.R. (Aerial Imaging and Reporting) Greg Agvent, Paul Ferguson, Shaun Mithcell (Altus CEO) CNN Center Atlanta, GA ph: E. M. Pio Roda / CNN

Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs), commonly known as “drones,” use to be only found in military bases or training camps. However, now, drones are being utilized for so much more, including civilian and commercial use and even in the journalistic settings. Moreover, this technology has been seen as an asset to many different industries and has made life a little easier and sometimes cheaper. For example, it allows for easier and faster medical assistance by giving first responders a bird’s eye view of their surroundings; it could help uncover lost hikers in dense woods that a plane couldn’t provide. It helps photographers capture images of certain areas that are not safe for people, such as explosion sites or places plagued with radiation. It could even take the place of a helicopter during high profile news events such as a missing person report or a high-speed car chases.

With the array of opportunities and versatility drones provide, it is no secret why different industries are interested in adopting this new technological innovation, especially in journalism. While drone development in journalism is becoming a hot debate and even utilized in certain classrooms, it also arises questions of privacy, ethical concerns and what is constitutional.

In The Economist, an article titled “Eyes in the Skies; Drone Journalism,” notes that drones have not only been making news, but it has started gathering it, too. It reports that drones have been used to shoot the most revealing footage of protests and different civil conflicts in places such as Thailand, Venezuela and more. It was used to cover protests in Bangkok back in December, allowing more in-depth coverage without putting reporters’ lives in danger by having them dodge tear gas, water-cannons and violence induced by protests, like before. Moreover, it also helps journalists overcome logistical hurdles, too. Drones have been used to cover fires and floods because it gives viewers a unique, airborne perspective that would be too dangerous to get any other way (Eyes in the Skies, Drone Journalism, 2014).

protest with fire

My own classmate, in my last year of undergrad, utilized drone footage in one of her news gathering projects about the history of Dinky Town by the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities East Bank Campus. She found this technological innovation to be the best device to showcase how much Dinky Town has changed over the years, and without a budge for a helicopter, she was able to use the next best thing, a drone. Watch from 001-06 seconds.

This is just one example of how drones have made its way into the educational setting. According to Maria Marron’s article, “Drones in Journalism Education,” The University of Nebraska-Lincoln and the Missouri School of Journalism are just a few of the schools offering courses that use drones as news gathering tools in journalism. Even journalistic conventions are popping up all over the world to inform, teach, and cater to the use of drones in journalism. For example, News Summer: Hack the Newsroom will feature a session on drones as it promises to look at covering a demonstration from the air, and mapping a conflict or a catastrophe-hit areas. While another convention illuminating visual storytelling will feature a segment on agile systems and responsive designs utilized by drones (Marron, 2013).

While many educational systems are trying to implement drones into their curriculum, some argue that it is hindering the development of any hands on skills journalists receive by shooting and editing video themselves. They note that it is important to develop skills that are complementary to technology rather than ones that can be easily replaced by it, (Marron, 2013).

The worry of this technology replacing the skills of journalists of the past, present and future is not the only critique drones used as a newsgathering tool face. While it does have great potential to help journalists cover disasters, it also makes it easier to keep tabs on celebrities and public figures, unleashing an array of privacy and ethical concerns. While journalists are no stranger to fighting communication laws and privacy laws, new technologies have challenged the way we understand what it means to have a “reasonable expectation of privacy, (Wolfgang, 2013, pg 21) especially as privacy changes all the time with technology. The basic rule is that an individual cannot use technology to peer into a place where a person should feel safe in letting their guard down and not expect to be recorded, such as at home.

Moreover, in Kathleen Culver’s article, “From Battlefield to Newsroom: Ethical Implications of Technology in Journalism,” she notes that there are four common ethical concerns that appear the most when professionals and scholars talk about drones being used in the journalistic setting: safety, accuracy and context, privacy, and conflict of interest. Safety is the first and immediate consideration when focusing on journalists flying drones, as they must first and foremost look out for people within the area in which the drones are being flown. Also, it possess many liability risks for the not only UAV companies that face product liability for a malfunctioning device, but also the new station’s and journalists whom operate them as well. If a drone crashes or injures a civilian, the new station and journalist could be sued and lose their job. Moreover, it also poses the ethical questions of whether risks to personal public safety can be rationally justified as a way to gather news content.

protests

Another concern that plagues professionals is accuracy and the context in which the drone footage is used. While drones hold the promise to improve the range of information available on issues dealing with natural disasters, protests, and dangerous situations, it also diminishes the accurate portrayal of specific facts needed and required by a reporter to put the facts into context. Utilizing a drone would take away the accuracy and context in which a journalist works. Sure, you can show a photo of a crowd protesting, but you will not have a reporter gathering natural sound bites of people expressing different viewpoints, which takes a way from the holistic purpose of a journalist, be unbiased and cover all sides on an issue. But how can you cover all sides of an issue, if you don’t know what/how people feel because you just used a drone?

Moreover, issues of privacy raised by drones provide the greatest entanglement of law and ethics. While journalists main function is to be a watchdog for the people to monitor a corrupt government, access to a drone would provide eyes for both public and private citizens. This arises the questions of “reasonable expectation of privacy,” and while it is off limits to record anyone at home, shared and public spaces becomes a dispute. While journalists often actively cover events, they are seen videotaping and taking pictures, making it easy for a personal to reasonably predict whether her activities were being recorded or not, since they can see where the camera is pointed. However, with a drone in the sky, people may questions whether the drone captured the entire event or solely focused on them, making privacy and ethical issues the biggest altercation of them all.

Finally, the last argument noted when disputing over drones used as a newsgathering tool is the conflict of interest. Journalism organizations and news rooms will need to start and establish guidelines about what information will be shared beyond publication, so its use of drones will not become an unwitting surrogate for governmental authorities such as Homeland Security, Customs, and Border Patrol. News media cannot allow themselves to be used by authorities as a means to circumvent civil liberties of CIA surveillance and spying, especially those government entities that are barred rom conducting their won surveillance. They will turn to news media as a remedy and surrogate opening an array of ethical issues and conflicts of interest (Culver, 2014).

fire

While drones can be used to save the lives of journalists, cover natural disasters and events that are just too dangerous for journalists, they also pose a great risk to public safety, security and privacy. However, journalism organizations are exploring ways to apply existing ethic codes to this new technological innovation in hopes to try and figure out a solution. While many education systems are incorporating drones into their curriculum, it is no secret that this innovation will soon make its way to newsrooms all around the world. It is a cheaper and a safer alternative than the use of helicopters and putting the lives of journalists at risk. However, while many question the ethical implications attached the use of drones, some are figuring out ways to reach an accord.

 

Culver, Kathleen. “From Battlefield to Newsroom: Ethical Impliations of Drone Technology in Journalism.” 16 Jan. 2014. Vol 29. Journal of Mass Media Ethics.

“Eyes in the Skies; Drone Journalism.” The Economist. 29 Mar. 2014, p. 64(US). Educators Reference. 

Marron. B Maria. “Drones in Journalism.” 01 May 2013. Vol 68 Issue 2, p 95-98. Journalism & Mass Communication Educator. 

Wolfgang, D. “Droning On.” Quill[serial online]. March 2013: 101(2):18-24. Communications & Mass Media Complete. 

Advertisements

Blog 18: Privacy Concerns

Gina Neff and Dawn Nafus, Self Tracking Chapters 5 and 6

While Neff and Nafus’s Self-Tracking comes to a close, I thought it was intriguing to read about their thoughts on data privacy and security. This portion of chapter 6 really tickled my fancy, as privacy concerns have taken the world by storm. While privacy in self-tracking data is likely to be an ongoing renegotiation in the best of circumstances, Apps, trackers and wearables will continue to raise concerns and technologies evolve and new decisions are made about where data goes.

I found this statement quite interesting as Neff and Nafus point out that many, I should say almost all, of us don’t know where our information is going nor how much is really gathered about us. While much of our health and wellness data gathered by fitbit’s are able to be monitored and tracked, how much of our actual doctors visits are actually kept private as the law states? Moreover, Neff and Nafus raised a startling point on page 175, that “not only could your data be used against you if handled improperly, it could also be used to find you.” Find me? Now, that is a scary thought. Would that change the course of the witness protection program? Am I thinking too far ahead? I feel it is bound to catch up to those organizations sooner or later making it almost hard for those who need to go on the lamb feel completely private. Anyway, I digress. Neff and Nafus explain this sobering point that by finding us, they really mean that much of this individual data could be so tailored that it will ultimately lead to the attribution and identification of specific individuals.

Moreover, they write that while data collected in the doctors offices do offer us one type of protection, we do not have that same security from data gathered from our smartphones, web searches and digital devices. This makes me wonder, which information do we think is more private what we share with the doctor or what we say to others online, what we search online in our free-time, and what sites we are one the most? Perhaps we share more with companies than we do with our own doctors? Maybe the legal protections are protecting the wrong data?

 

Questions?

  1. Would you be more nervous sharing your information you share with your doctor or for people to see what you are searching in the wee hours of the night?
  2. Do you think as time goes on that the privacy rights will be more strict on what we are putting online? Or do you think it will never be recognized as a security concern?
Neff, G. & Nafus, D. (2016). Self-Tracking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Blog 17: Habit Hacking: Changing for your device, but not your significant other

Gina Neff and Dawn Nafus, “Self-Tracking” Chapters 3 and 4

While Chapters 3 and 4 focused on a broad range of implications with Self Tracking, I found the most interesting piece to be on the section of “habit hacking.” When I first read this section (89-104), I couldn’t help but wonder how our society got like this. We have become so addicted to our wearable technologies and self tracking devices, that we have even allowed it to change our habits?

There are many Pinterest and Tumblr quotes about relationships, that sport a beautiful flower in the background with fancy scripture on the picture that says, “you shouldn’t let anyone change you,” or something similar. To be honest there are many variations of this quote, but something we probably hear, read, and see all the time. You shouldn’t let your significant other change you, so why are we letting our wearable technologies?

Neff and Nafus write that many self-trackers use data to support “habit hacking” or creating new habits and changing old ones. This is usually done by incorporating many different elements by identifying what habits need changing, assessing whether the current arrangements in the environment are supporting the ultimate goal, and tinkering with new ways of doing things. Some examples may include changing your eating habits, improving your exercise intake, tracking the amount of water you drink, and even changing your sleep schedule. There are apps for all these new habits as you start slowly replacing coffee in the morning with tea, and then bring in lemon water. These wearable technologies are influencing habits and changing them perhaps for the better, but how is that we are able to so easily change for our wearable’s, but not our significant other? Everyone should love you for you, even your self-tracking devices.

Question:

  1. When did it become socially acceptable to change habits based on what wearables tell you and recommend over what your loved ones tell you?
  2. Do you think habit hacking devices can have negative implications as well? Rather than just helping you break the bad habits, do you think perhaps you will be too busy checking your device to see how much steps you got in that day or how much water you drank, that it will ultimately take you away from important life altering moments?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Neff, G. & Nafus, D. (2016). Self-Tracking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Blog 16: An Introduction to Self Tracking

Gina Neff and Dawn Nafus, “Self- Tracking” chapters 1 and 2

tacking devices

Gina Neff and Dawn Nafus dedicate chapters 1 and 2 to finding out the positive and negative implications of self tracking and how we went from tracking our own activity manually to thinks tracking ourselves. Furthermore, Chapter 1 opens up by not only posing the question of how did we get here, but how is our information now being used.

For example, Neff and Nafus write that while monitoring has been going on for decades – baby monitors, sleep monitors, pedometers, bike monitors, and heart sensors – there has been a shift in how information has been used. Before, it seems as if none of the monitors were able to be tracked by outside sources, but now all sensors and monitors are connected to phones, towers, and data centers.

With that being said, Neff and Nafus spend chapter one diving into the implications of data tracking and how that information is being handled societally. They admit that the capacity to gather data outpaces their ability to make sense of it making it a challenge to sometimes understand the broader implications and effects these innovations and devices have on our bodies. This is especially prevalent in the healthcare field as many self tracking’s such as heart monitors, pace makers, and medical devices are being used to track health activity, but I can’t help but wonder if doctors and nurses have a hard time making sense of this data what security will that lend to the patient and they demand information and updates on their current health.

These two chapters gave me insight into those that monitor and read data and exactly what they are doing to make sense of it. It is interesting to read about how us as humans are being quantified into data and what that means for emerging and current technologies. Moreover, with self tracking being a heated debate, you can’t help, but wonder how far they are willing to go before privacy concerns come into play. While privacy is a big fear of many in the world, there are many technologies and social media sites that take advantage our privacy without even knowing it, but should be fault those technologies that actually use our data for good just because a few bad innovations are using ours for advertising and monetary gain?

Questions:

  1. In the health care system, many of the tracking devices are used for good. Could you think of any devices that might have negative implications?
  2. Where do we draw the line of ethical and unethical self tracking? Does it have to do with how much an innovation improves the quality of life or perhaps more of less how often we use that innovation?

 

Neff, G. & Nafus, D. (2016). Self-Tracking. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Blog 15: Forward Thinking

Samuel Greengard’s “The Internet of Things” Chapter 7

As Greengard closes the final chapters of The Internet of Things it is no secret that Greengard reflects on the power of innovation and begins to think forward. He starts the final chapter by reiterating all the new ways the IoT has helped or contributed to society. With a startling statistic of human error accounts for 70 to 80 percent of vehicle collisions (167), Greengard writes about all the helpful ways the IoT can shape society.

For example, Greengard mentions that self driving and self parking cars can eliminate collisions. Moreover, new innovations in medicine could help diabetes, help administer drugs, grow organs by 3D printers and much more. Greengard continues to mention the positive affect the IoT could have on farming while it monitors fertilization and pesticide control. His passion for the IoT doesn’t stop there as he continues to mention the consumer affects as Amazon (for example) was trying to delivery packages by drones.

However, with all these innovations at work, Greengard mentions that while the IoT are intended to help society, he wonders how we humans will adapt. He writes that, “the biggest questions revolves around living in a world where almost everything is monitored, recorded, and analyzed” (p. 176). He worries that making every activity visible will expose the gap between the way we think people behave and the way we think they ought to be have.

Finally, after gaining insight into Greengards account of the IoT, and learning about the new emerging technologies, the ones that have already been marketed to the public, and the ideas of companies, I couldn’t help but wonder how do we accept that – the new integration of technology and society as we know it – this is normal. Where is the shift from awkwardness and normal, will it get better with time?

He ends the chapters by showcasing the day in the life of Mark Smith in 2025 and uses that as a juxtaposition of the start of the book, which was a day in the life of him in current times. I enjoyed how he incorporated a full circle ending, and I feel that this is one of my favorite of the books we have read thus far because of the thought provoking questions and insights.

Questions:

  1. How will the IoT affect the way we communicate not just with other humans, but with other machines as well.
  2. With technology replacing so many innovations such as cars, medical corporations etc, are we going to see a decrease in jobs?

 

Blog 14 The Internet of Things and The Real World

Samuel Greengard’s “The Internet of Things” Chapters 5 & 6

Greengard opens chapter five with an overview of how far technology has come. He writes that many devices – ranging from basic systems to complex devices found in bodies, pipes and crevices – are changing the way humans interact with each other. Furthermore, he also explains with this complex and basic machinery there is bound to be hangups and errors. Greengard focuses on the errors and failures within these systems as well as the triumphs they’ve had throughout the world.

Moreover, when diving deeper into chapters 5 and 6, Greengard focuses on this idea of building a better sensor and the role that plays in “big data.” However, before going into the tricky realm of “big data,” it is important to note Greengard writes that as sensors allow the IoT to work, it opens the doors for increasing innovations for sensors which leads to a vast array of consumer and business systems (p. 121).

While tiny sensors in our devices may get a bad reputation, especially when throwing the word “big data” around, which is large data sets that are analyzed to reveal patterns, trends, and associations, especially relating to human behavior and interactions. It is important to note that besides companies tapping into your personal devices to target advertisements at you, sensors can also be used for good.

Greengard notes that these sensors put in devices not only detect our personal interactions for monetary gain, but also measure minute concentrations of pollutions or toxic substances in the atmosphere and water supply. These sensors can also detect changes in structures, such as bridges and tunnels. Some innovations have even gone so far as to be able to park a car!

Moreover, I think it was important for Greengard to highlight the positive things sensors on our devices have helped change or detect in the real world. Too often we hear sensors and big data to have a negative connotation, and I am happy that Greengard has finally illuminated some of positives to remove the stigma.

 

Questions:

  1. Do you think there was a specific innovation that caused the turn of sensors and technology to have a negative connotation that usually leads to privacy concerns? Could it be some of our social media platforms?
  2. I am curious, what is next for sensors. Will they soon be able to detect live threatening diseases before they appear? Perhaps even in a fetus?

Blog 13: It’s Not Evolutionary. It’s Revolutionary

Samuel Greengard’s “The Internet of Things” Chapters 3 & 4

Samuel Greengard’s Internet of Things has been my favorite book we have read in this course so far because it not only takes you on a brief walk through historical innovations, but highlights and illuminates aspects of technological advances one doesn’t normally think about. For example, Greengard notes in Chapter 3 that mobile technology (smartphones) have now allowed tangible physical objects to be tagged and transformed into potential data points for research and analysis.

Big data

Moreover, Greengard exmpalins that the capability to extract this data from a wide array of devices has helped humans gain a better insight into patterns, trends, and behavior in a comprehensive way. He notes that data pulling to gain insight was just the beginning as we are seeing mobile devices being linked to social media allowing for the flow of more data and information on peoples daily lives.

Another topic of much debate especially in politics has been that of big data. Greengard notes in chapter 3 that big data sourcing and how that equals big results. He acknowledges that big data has become a buzzword, specifically for privacy concerns, but is also a valid concept that focuses on collecting, storing and using data sets to gain insight into many different realms not just those of privacy concerns and breaks them up into three categories: volume, velocity, and variety.

Moreover, he explains volume as the amount of data collected, velocity as the speed at which data are generated and utilized, and variety which refers to the breadth of data that now exists. All of this together illuminates how far we have come in technological advancement and how our mobile devices can be utilized as a large supply chain of data that is the backbone of the marketing world.

Another ideal featured in chapter 4 that captivated me was this idea of a world without wires and the shift from homes with 50 electrical outlets to those with only a few, but a box operating wireless connections is plugged into one. I find that kind of ironic. All of our wireless routers help keep everything connected wireless and through the air, but the main frame itself needs to be plugged in to an electrical outlet. However, I digress.

The first part of chapter 4, Greengard notes that almost every technological innovation has had a leading breakthrough of improvement such as the lamp and the washing machine. Greengard notes that all “connected devices change the way we think about products and things, and they drive enormous changes in behavior as well” (pg. 82). He juxtaposes examples from the past to present as he writes about how technological advancements have shaped the economy as we once were paying for local theaters tickets, but now we are live streaming or finding our movies elsewhere. This example is just one of the many Greengard features to illuminate how connected devices have changed society and have translated into the connection of people along the way.

Questions:

  1. Do you think there will ever be a wireless main device that can work wireless and doesn’t have to be plugged in. Right now all of our wifi routers have to be plugged into an electrical outlet, which I find sort of ironic. Perhaps our next innovation will be a wireless router that is actually wireless itself?

Greengard, Samuel. The Internet of Things. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Chapters 3 & 4]

Blog 12 The Internet of Things

Introduction, chapters 1 & 2 of Samuel Greengard’s “The Internet of Things”

Samuel Greengard starts his book in chapter one by taking an unsual approach. He begins telling readers his morning routine and gives them a play-by-play in the life of someone with technologies such as a fitbit, Iphone and interactive apps utilized for his fitness morning routine. If someone would have been reading this ten years ago, they would suspect this was a work of fiction, but as Greengard points out, this routine is standard and the new norm.

Samuel Greengard’s The Internet of Things begins by explaining that technological advancements didn’t necessarily start once the internet took the world by storm. Greengard writes that many of the worlds first advancements weren’t technology based at all, but instead changed the way people operated and lived. Some inventions Greengard credits these advancements too are things we usually take for granted such as the refrigerator, sewing machines, telephones, typewriters, cameras, and washing machines. He explains that technological advancement is merely anything that redefined how people interact, communicate or go about their daily work/lives.

Moreover, when focusing on the internet, Greengard credits the technology revolution to be sparked by Apple’s introduction to the Iphone in 2007. He explains that Apple put the smartphones in the hands of the masses and from there it was a huge catalysts and the snowball effect ensued. He writes that by 2014 more than 500 million Iphones have been sold, and predicts by 2019 more than 5.6 billion will have left the store.

I think it is very interesting from the very beginning of the chapters to focus on the Iphone and smartphone devices because Greengard notes that this catalyst inspired the creation of other machines that can be paired with or connected to to help serve as remote controls, dashboards and information feeds.

Moreover, he utilizes the example of the Iphone to illuminate just how far we have come in technology to reiterate how far we are still going. He writes that it is impossible to tell what is next, but speculates that the Internet of things will certainly take us to places so technology-centric, it would not be unheard of it we started to have automated homes, drive smart vehicles, shop in interactive stores, and find new innovations in health and wellness.

Questions:

  1. Out of all the advancements that have emerged over time, are they any that pop into your head where you think it was never useful? Or have all the new innovations that emerged helped society be proactive in some way?
  2. What do you think the most important or influential innovation is to society and why? If you could only choose one.

 

 

Greengard, Samuel. The Internet of Things. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. [Introduction, Chapter 1 & Chapter 2]

Blog 11 Conclusion of Rhetoric

Richard Toye: Rhetoric: A Very Short Introduction

 Chapter 4 & Conclusion (pgs. 82 – 112)

As Richard Toye’s A Very Short Introduction comes to a close we cannot help but deduce the scripture into two main themes, improvement and circumstance. Toye explains these two ideals throughout the entire book, but doesn’t highlight them until the conclusion. He writes about these two themes as a sort of strife with one another as these main themes have conflicting points.

When referring to the first main theme of improvement, Toye highlights the ideals of empowerment and knowledge as you learn how to improve your communication skills through understanding, studying and paying attention to simple rhetorical techniques that have been in place for thousands of years.

Toye explains that learning rhetorical techniques can help the construction or arguments which will help improve persuasive essays, reports and presentations. Toye also writes the importance of learning these techniques is not only helpful for the orator, but also helpful to the intended audience. It will help people asses the validity and will deter people from being misled by plausible, but flawed appeals, which will help reiterate the intended purpose of rhetoric (pg, 108).

Moreover, Toye notes his second theme most prevalent in the book conflicts with the first theme by expressing that not even the most skillful orators practicing these rhetorical techniques correctly are immune to other hindering factors. In other words, even the checklist presented throughout the book of viable rhetorical techniques will not turn you completely into a compelling orator.

As this conflicts with the first ideal, Toye explains the shift of rhetorical knowledge to social phenomenons. He notes that rhetoric is a social phenomenon and its reception depends on the social norms that are instilled in society during that time period. Moreover, Toye believes that rheotic is a motor that drives forward societal change and not something that merely reflects it.

I enjoyed reading Toye because it helped condense literally thousands of years into clear concise knowledge that made sense. He was able to explain a complicated subject of rhetoric and teach others how to conduct their own rhetorical analysis. He referred a lot to historical figures in war such as Hitler, which helped put rhetoric into recognizable contexts. Overall, I think this book was a great stepping stone into the world of rhetoric.

 

Questions:

  1. What are some examples of rhetorical speeches framed in their time periods? Toye notes that rhetoric is more successful when focusing on societal norms of them times, so what techniques would work now that wouldn’t work a hundred years ago and vice versa.

2. Who do you think is the greatest persuader that utilizes rhetorical techniques.

Blog 10: The Fundamentals of Rhetoric

In Toye’s, Rhetoric: A Very Short Introduction, he dedicates chapters two and three to exploring the fundamentals and different techniques of rhetoric. One quote that stuck out to me that really illuminated the importance of the study in itself was when Toye wrote (and as Aristotle suggested), “the art of rhetoric lies in identifying the opportunities presented by the situation at hand, not in the sterile combination of figures of speech for their own sake” (pg. 33). I thought this quote was a good introduction into the ideals of visual rhetoric, the three branches of orator, and the five canons.

According to Toye, the three branches of orator are, forensic/judicial, epideictic/display, and deliberative. To dive into these concepts further he explains that forensic/judicial is found in legal contexts, epideictic/display, is concerned with praise or blame, and deliberative is usually used to persuade such as a group of voters or legislators. However, with definitions as easy to distinguish as these, Toye notes that many times in rhetoric the lines are blurred making it difficult to discover which speech is being used in certain situations.

Moreover, Toye also discussed another technique utilized in rhetorical analysis known as The Five Canons. He describes the five canons to be: invention/discover, arrangement/ style, memory, and delivery. He notes that this represents a division of rhetoric that can be utilized and applied to any branch or branches of oratory speech. To explain these further he states that invention/discovery refers to the process of coming up with arguments appropriate to the situation. While arrangement is concerned with how the material is laid out. For example, is there an introduction, a narration of facts, an outline, proof and conclusion? Furthermore he goes on to explain memory as different ways to retrieve the information one would like to convey. While delivery examines how the information is conveyed both verbally and nonverbally, accent, posture, gestures, tone of voice etc.

While chapter three did a great job at laying out the framework and fundamentals of rhetoric, Toye utilized chapter 4 to demonstrate how to actually conduct a rhetorical analysis itself. He goes on to explain the work of rhetorical analysis is no longer that of the scholars. People are able to create their own rhetorical analysis especially nowadays with the influence of technologies and the Internet. People are now able to take control and start challenging leaders in their society by studying rhetoric in hopes to help illuminate speakers intentions.

 

Questions:

  1. How can one know which fundamentals/techniques are better to use in different circumstances?
  2. With the increase of the internet, could visual evoke a sense of feeling or ideal that could maybe have its own sector with Ethos, Pathos, and Logos? Is there room for another appeal?