My Take Two

So! Apparently, I don't follow direction well. Here's the article we were SUPPOSED to blog about.

1. Alright, the article was decent. It was too long. Should have been about 4 paragraphs shorter. I know they could have cut it down, but they didn't. It held my attention up until the list. Then I stopped caring. The author has a nice voice. It sounds like he's actually talking to me. I like the accessibility. Lastly, I like that he even thought up this article. I've never been a blogger, but I like the idea behind them, and now that people are "trusting" them, I look forward to blogging in the future.
BLOGBLOGBLOGBLOGBLOGBLOG. That's a fun word to say.

2. This article itself is a fallacy. It's a bifurcation. News is either blogs or "else." This doesn't hold water! Blogs are not a source of news. That in and of itself renders the rest of the article useless, because blogs don't compete with news sources. They may discuss, criticize, praise or ignore them, but blogs have not, do not, and will not compete with sites like CNN.com, or the New York Times. It just won't happen.
However, if the underlying argument was valid, the article would have made good points. The idea of transparency, I think, is one of the most important areas for blogs to shine above "other" news sources. The blogs that are able to be trusted are the blogs that cite themselves, acknowledge mistakes, and state their own opinion, rather than spitting out half digested facts and generalizations. Blogs and bloggers are human in source, and more accessible than a front page newspaper article.

I like the idea, just not the way it's presented. Less emphasis on competition between blogs and other media, and more emphasis on the rise of reliable, informative blogs would have made this article better.

My First Mistake

So! here goes nothing...my first blog. First of all, i apologize for the fact that i rarely use capital letters. It bothers even me sometimes.

1. I like the general direction of this article. I think that it is an article based in reality, and I also think that it has a very strong ending. However, it strikes me that TV is such a staple to the American way that it will stay around for a long, long time. Progress is being continually made, but some things have more staying power than others, and I think TV is one of those things.

2. The arguments in this article are strong and varied. I find it slightly ironic, though, that the article is attacking the variety in media with a wide variety of arguments. Either way, the arguments are strong. With the exception of one or two generalizations, and one case of attacking the source, rather than the argument (Paragraph 2), the arguments are well laid out, easy to follow, and they are not fallacies. I take fault with the author, however, for not citing or documenting much of what he argues. The material is easy enough to look up, but citing one's work is crucial to laying a strong foundation for an argument.
Without a doubt, the strongest argument in the essay lies in the 15th paragraph, the study by Robert Putnam. It is well documented and really drives home the point of the article. In fact, much of the article could be cut back thanks to this paragraph.

What I'm saying is "Well done, Michael Hedges."

My First Blog

So I think what I'll do is title every blog like a Scrubs episode. I hope that's not a copyright infringement.

Hey Kainoa...You rock. Seriously, I've had nothing but crappy English teachers, so I'm really excited that this year I might actually learn how to write.

This was merely a test.