In his paper, Smart studies the arguments and discourse communities surrounding the debate on global warming and climate change. Smart focuses on what resources the public has to see the professional debates and ideas, and makes the claim that a well developed blog can have more of an impact on the public sphere than a publication or mention in a well-known magazine or newspaper. This is especially true, due to how quickly a blog author can update their pages, and rapidly respond to blogs make by fellows and rivals.
The concept of discourse communities arises multiple times throughout the paper. Smart uses these communities specifically when referring to scientists that follow different branches of thought towards global warming. Additionally, the whole article revolves around “the public sphere”, which in the loosest sense is the outgroup an author or informer is trying to get the attention of and appeal to. It was very interesting that Smart brought up the varying assumptions that scientists have made in the past towards the public sphere. Some assume that the public they are appealing to are fully educated, while others assume that most of the audience has a basic grasp of science. Still yet, a majority of authors write as if the audience has no prior knowledge of the subjects discussed. Smart’s findings are almost directly related to our final project, as it is about proposing new site descriptions for the Rhode Island Nature Conservancy. These descriptions are available to anyone with an interest in hiking, so making the description stand out in some way is vital to being able to “sell” the trail or preserve. Being aware of the sphere’s wants is necessary here. Key features of the hike are the true sell, such as the flora and fauna, location, accessibility, and more. By combining these selling points with visually appealing, images gathered from the site, the designers can create a webpage that would make people want to hike that particular trail.
2 Comments
Stanley Pazdziora
4/2/2018 10:18:09 am
I completely agree with your analysis of the paper and your discussion about audience is very relevant and well thought out. As for how you will be applying this to your own paper, I like how you have a concrete idea of how to go about it. I look forward to seeing how you go about this. Great job!
Reply
Jacob Fies
4/3/2018 10:58:56 am
I really liked your take on how Smart’s ideas relate back to our final project. I initially thought that due to the nature of our writing, we wouldn’t have to really “convince” people of anything, but after reading your thoughts I can really see it the other way.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorZachary Wagner Archives |