Blog 6

According The Economics of Attention: Style and Substance in the Age of Information, written by Richard A. Lahnam, the C-B-S model argues that clarity, brevity, and sincerity are the only reason for communication (137). With this model words become things. If one wants to express something they should be clear and concise in what they say. Also the words and information should be brief, without fluff. Further, words should be sincere in that words should not be used to persuade anybody one way or the other.  Regardless of the information or format one should tell the entire truth. Additionally the CBS model requires all information to be disclosed immediately.

Conversely, Lanham argues that rhetoric and method are both important. Contending that rhetoric and method are what we actually mean to communicate. Further, Lanham suggests we must analyze the way in which we create discourse. This is not an easy thing to do since our language and discourse skills are ingrained in us as part of our culture. It is very difficult to separate the two issues.

I agree that if we as a society always followed the C-B-S model we would have no poetry, music, or any other creative writing works. Reading would be extremely boring and tedious if this model is always utilized. There are some situations in which this model would be very effective and efficient but should be used in only those situations. Some situations the C-B-S model should be utilized in are technical writing, legal documents, and medical documents.

In addition, I personally enjoy reading different authors because of their different writing styles. I am more engaged when a writer can convey something to the reader that is an undertone or hidden in the text. This is a talent that should not be dismissed or eliminated. I think anyone can write a message but a true writer can convey the information in any number of methods.

Works Cited

Lanham, Richard A. "Chapter 4." The Economics of Attention: Style and Substance in the Age of

Information. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2007. 130-56. Print.

Blog 5

In James R. Klambach's article, “Publishing before Computer”, he explains how the invention of the alphabet allowed more people to communicate and to place information into a type of memory. A memory that is more efficient to the human memory. In doing so the alphabet allowed for longer texts. Klambach further explains, “New technologies enabled the Greeks to use the written language in different ways.” (222).

Much like the Greeks, we are also using the written language in a different way. Within our society we have created the opposite of the Greeks in that sometimes we like to limit our texts to 140 characters or less. This abbreviated communication is what I will call TweeTech. This technology will change the way people are able to communicate by making the participants more succinct in what they say. This will also make them more creative in how they will show the emotion behind the thought. A way of making visual rhetoric out of semi-colons, periods, and other punctuation symbols will add to the emotional appeal of the written text.

Another way in which TweeTech will alter the human population is by either excluding or including individuals within various communities. Exclusion of individuals will occur because if one has not learned the vocabulary of TweeTech it will appear to be illogical and nonsensical. The alienation of individual will happen quickly as more people begin speaking in TweeTech. It has been my experience that many young TweeTech users enjoy using the vocabulary while speaking with friends. This is the inclusive aspect of TweeTech. If you understand the vocabulary you are able to be included in the conversation.

As one can see Klambach was correct in that not only does “New technologies enabled the Greeks to use the written language in different ways.” It also enables TweeTechers to do the same.

idk wat r ur thoughts?  :-/ tmi?


Works Cited:
Kalmbach, James. "Publishing Before Computers." 2002. Web. 1 Oct. 2010