PB2B: Moves

Backpacks vs. Briefcase and Navigating Genres: Analyzing the Moves

                Backpacks vs. Briefcase and Navigating Genres were two readings from the beginning of the course during the study of genre and analyzing its conventions. Both of these readings fall under the literary genre of "genre analysis"

                Backpacks vs Briefcases establishes the target audience in the opening paragraph with a relevant quote: "Imagine the first day of class in first year composition at your university". Not only does it provide a somewhat interesting introduction to draw in a reader, it sets up the idea of who the writing is targeted to (most likely first years in a composition class at a university). The introduction also lays down many questions to relate the idea of the opening quote to the context of the entire reading. The sections that follow are labelled with a sub title dividing each set of paragraphs and setting up the reader for what the section is about. It also serves as a transition when switching from one idea to another. Another move that Carroll uses to appeal to an audience is using various media sources that a freshman university student will mostly be able to relate to. The author effectively uses the notion of genre and applies it to concepts such as social media and advertising. The analysis and conclusion that Carroll provides emphasizes the importance of context and persuasion even outside the realm of academic writing.

                Navigating Genres is similar to Backpacks vs Briefcases in that they both discuss genre. Even more similarly, Dirk uses a joke in the hook to also draw in the reader and make a connection to the subject matter. "Because it just so happens that in order to get this joke, you must know a little something about country music in general and in particular country music lyrics". This is Dirk's way of relating the introduction to the concept of genre, very similar to the way Carroll connects the first impression of a teacher to analyzing for genre. Unlike Carroll, Dirk does not set the target for the audience of the reading through the introduction. The body paragraphs are set in a different tone, characterized by Dirk's use of "I" to convey concepts to the reader: "I will admit...". The examples brought into the text are from other textual sources, namely other books and readings mostly about the topic of genre itself. While Dirk does use some social media examples sources like Carroll ("By this point you might realize that you have been participating in many different genres—whether you are telling a joke, writing an email, or uploading a witty status on Facebook"), they use them in different ways. Carroll uses the media sources like Facebook as the primary means of analyzing genre, while Dirk uses them to illustrate and supplement the ideas from the other texts sourced. Dirk also makes creates an example (the ransom letter) to illustrate the concept of genre conventions.

                The two readings are very similar in the material discussed, but very different in the way they are written and external sources are integrated. In my opinion, the moves used in Backpacks vs Briefcases were better for the audience that the readings are presented to. For example, the opening paragraph of the text was very relevant to when it was assigned as reading at the beginning of the quarter. The moves are effective because they are shared in a writing class primarily filled with students reading them before making genre analysis and writing about them. Carroll's move of relying on examples that a student would find more interesting and relevant makes it more interesting. Dirk uses more examples from other books that students most likely are not as interested or familiar in. However, Dirk's ransom letter example and analysis of the conventions that went into writing it are very effective because of how simply dissected the genre is. It mixes in some humor with a very good anecdote about the practical and textual forms that genre conventions add up to create different types of writing.

                Both Backpacks vs. Briefcase and Navigating Genres are informative readings about of the 'genre' genre, but both present their information in different ways. These moves made by the author were done specially to appeal to the audience in the most effective way. They are unique to each author and can be used to distinguish one piece of literature from another from a different person.

PB2A

Scholarly academic publication: http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0119470

This academic publication is about anatomy, specifically about using resonance imaging to see what happens inside the knuckles when they are cracked. Being a scientific paper on a research journal website, it follows many of the usual conventions of a research paper. It has a title that concise and utilizes complex and technical to describe the experiment in a few amount of words. Under the title, the names of the researchers and the date of publishing is included. The first paragraph is an abstract that explains broadly the scope and results of the experiment.  The rest of the paper contains the details of the experiment sorted into multiple sections with their own headings. Diagrams and photographs are distributed throughout to explain things. Acknowledgements and citations are at the bottom to reference other researchers and their research.  

Scigen generates a convincing but fake computer science research paper. It has all the conventions that a normal research paper would, like title, authors, and various sections outlining results of the experiment.  Though the Scigen paper and the PLOS paper both fall under the same genre, they have some differences. The audience for the PLOS paper can be less technical, due to less jargon being used. In addition, cracking knuckles is a much easier concept for the average person to understand when compared to mathematical algorithm comparisons that are commonly generated in Scigen. The context and the choice of words also on the PLOS paper is also less technical in nature than the CS paper. Also, the CS paper is most likely designed to be printed out or read in a document form. It has no external links or color pictures, a sign that it wasn't intended to be viewed mainly on a computer. On the other hand, the audience for the PLOS article is mainly one that will view the research online, because of the interactive galleries and external links directly embedded into the website. These things cannot be fully experienced once the page has been printed out or exported to a document, therefore the authors intend for this paper to be viewed online on their website.  

Though they are intended for different audiences (assuming the Scigen article is actually read by someone), the two papers have many similarities that qualify them to be considered to be of the same genre. They both begin with abstracts that allow the reader to have a rough idea of what the paper is about before reading it.  The abstract is followed by some form of background information providing context to the experiment, then to a section that describes the scientific processes used, then concludes with results and data gathered.

The selection of words and phrasing makes papers immediately identifiable as academic research. The firsst thing that people would read of any research paper is the title, and having a title that follows the convention of a research paper is the most important in establishing the nature of the paper to the reader. The title, as well as the text use within the body of the paper, should make no sense to someone who has no expertise in the field. Having something very difficult to understand makes an untrained audience less likely to be enthusiastic about reading what the paper has to offer. This is especially important for the Scigen papers, as the main purpose of the generated paper is to create "submissions to conferences that you suspect might have very low submission standards". Choosing language that is very technical and obscure is the best way to concisely share the research to experts in the field, as well as convince people that aren't experts that your research is legit.

PB1B

SCIgen: pdos.csail.mit.edu/scigen

                This website generates a very convincing yet completely made up research paper similar to one that computer science students would publish to get their degrees. The 'paper' is filled with fake citations, data, and charts that, during a cursory skim, look like legitimate. A typical research paper follows the scientific method, starting with an Abstract, introduction, and background information. Research papers are written in the past tense using a first person account, so the generator uses sentence that utilizes past tenses. Research papers also always reference to other research papers, using citations within the paragraph and the author's name.

pandyland.net/random

                Comic strips are usually multiple slides of a drawing and dialogue text printed on top. The random comic generator takes a random picture of 2 people with random expressions and links them together to simulate a comic. Without reading the words, the comic strip is characterized because of its visual and textual conventions.

memegenerator.net

                Memes always have a set of certain images with text printed on top in white impact bold font. Since memes are supposed to share a message on the internet, the meme generator also produces a link. One specific convention of a meme is a random picture. The pictures that the meme generator uses are all usually pictures that weren't intended to be popular, like a still scene from movie or someone's random yearbook picture.

Another genre generator: http://hackertyper.com/

                Hackertyper creates a random convincing looking computer program code by just mashing random keys on the keyboard. It is inspired by the depiction of "hacking" in movies where a character would pound keys with thier left and right fingers to produce some form of code, which eventually allows him/her to hack the system. The hackertyper displays green computer font text on a black background, similar to something that some terminals use. Computer codes usually have plenty of  {} and / and ; and = characters with indentation. Even pressing the left Alt key 3 times will give a message box that says "Access Granted" so it is easy to convince random people that you've hacked the computer.

                These generators are a good way to explore genre because each one produces different products that follow the same conventions. In each case, the individual outputs are not the same but they follow the same guidelines set by the person who designed the program. For the research paper generator, a list of scientific words are parsed to throw in. Scientist's names and links are also pulled from a list. The paper was compiled from a random selection of predetermined components. The attributes of the components are the conventions of the genre. The comic strip had multiple tiles that were stringed together and overlaid words. The meme generator allows the user to choose from a set of images that many other memes have utilized. Text is inputted and displayed in the same color and font as part of the convention of a meme. These generators cater to a specific audience and, with the exception of the meme generator, can fool an audience that is unfamiliar with the genre to believe it was real. This is because the products have the external appearance and textual conventions of the real thing, but the context is wrong. Genres can be distinguished without looking too deeply because of how certain cues can be identified without reading. 

PB1A

Genre: YouTube Comments

            Popular video-sharing site Youtube.com has a functionality that allows registered users to leave comments. The commenting system was praised when YouTube was first launched because of how collaborative it was compared to previous video sites. However, comments posted on YouTube have become infamous throughout the internet community because of their characteristic stupidity and immaturity.

                YouTube comments are directed at people who watch the videos or in a reply to another comment. Generally the audiences that the comments target are similar to the original poster because they are localized to one specific video.

                The purpose of a YouTube comment varies, but can be categorized into 2 broad groups. The first type of comment is someone making a remark relevant to the video and provides constructive collaboration. This type of comment is rare on the site. An example of this is can be found on video "How to assemble & install a ceiling fan with light kit", user Papa Poo provides a useful tip for future ceiling fan installers: "Here is a tip. For emergencies when you almost are going to drop the fan because you can't handle it weight don't take chances by releasing for the fan to drop it might tear the wires in the celling instead quickly cut the wires from the fan and quickly bring the fan down". He received multiple up-votes and thanks because other users found his advice useful.

                The second type of comment is very common on YouTube and is what gives YouTube comments its infamous reputation. These comments were described by The Guardian in 2009 as "Juvenile, aggressive, misspelled, sexist, homophobic, swinging from raging at the contents of a video to providing a pointlessly detailed description followed by a LOL." These are all valid conventions of a typical YouTube comment.

                The writing style of comments also vary. Some are concise yet make no sense. For example, user Branbits comments on the video "SEAWORLD WOMAN TRAINER KILLED BY KILLER WHALE!!" with "did he died?". The title specifies a woman was killed by a killer whale yet the commenter decides to post his comment anyway. On the other end of the spectrum, some are long and  rambling rants (usually found on political and religious videos) where a commenter makes an attempt to communicate their own philosophical ideas to viewers. Since the internet is widely accessible and YouTube is a large website, it is inevitable that people with different personal viewpoints will interact. YouTube user The Amazing Atheist discusses rogue feminists in his video the "Failure of Feminism". Expectedly, this created much disagreement. User ktelle words disagreement in a long rant attached in the screenshot. Her comment, like most others presenting opposing views on YouTube, follows the typical convention of one that expresses personal opinion. Many other comments have conventions that combine both to create many different unique yet equally stupid replies.

                Despite YouTube's various efforts to stem the reputation of ridiculous comments by adding an upvote/downvote system and requiring a full name through a Google Plus account, the flow continues. Some users have even turned the comments section into a source of entertainment that can transcend the amusement provided by the video itself.