User:Celestialspring/Evaluate an Article

Which article are you evaluating?
Here's the article that I decided to evaluate: Digital rhetoric

Why you have chosen this article to evaluate?
I've chosen to evaluate this article because it is about digital rhetoric which is a big part of communication studies and media.

Evaluate the article
The article's introductory sentence is very concise and gives a basic definition to digital rhetoric and the second sentence helps more clearly define the definition.

The definition section gives good information as to the history of the term but the early definition subsection doesn't give much insight as to how the term was used or defined and it feels very empty compared to the other more detailed subsections.

Under the concepts section, the subsection Circulation is concise yet detailed explanation.


 * The definition of the word crowdsourcing is too long and the second sentence feels unnecessary and doesn't add to the definition itself.
 * Under critical literacy, the University of Melbourne's comment about the importance of media literacy isn't necessary as it doesn't add much to the topic
 * The study done by the Indiana University in Bloomington about the political twitter messages is interesting and useful but it should be clarified as to why it is included in the critical literacy subsection as it could be difficult for someone to understand how the two correlate.
 * For the procedural rhetoric, I would've liked to see more examples because the definition is not clear and is very vague. It would give the reader better understanding if you gave more examples so then they can get an idea as to what counts as a process or practice.
 * The last sentence under rhetoric velocity isn't necessary to add.
 * The visual of the emoji should've been moved so then it aligns with the part talking about emojis so then it doesn't look out of place.
 * The link for Beth Kolko does not exist.

Under the Forms and Objects of Study section, they should have outlined the different subsections in the beginning so then the reader could understand what to expect under that section.


 * Under the People subsection, it talks about Social Media and Influencers and Content Creators. The two subjects are divided by the paragraph about Digital Activism and I think that they should have switched it so then the two are directly next to each other because it would make more sense because social media platforms are the mediums that influencers and content creators use and digital activism can be majorly influenced/cultivated by these influencers/content creators.
 * Under the online learning portion, I would've liked if they could've cited the part about how not all students use the ELMS but rather some students focus on the lecturer as the primary source of information as I would've liked to look into it more.
 * In the podcast portion, I wished they defined soundwriting and how podcasts can teach rhetoric practices through it.
 * The last sentence under the podcast portion should be put into simpler terms or should be worded in a way that doesn't confuse the reader.

Overall, the Critical Approaches section gives a lot of useful information on the different criticisms given to digital rhetoric and goes into a lot of detail with them. The last sentence under research ethics is not relevant to the topic and doesn't make much sense there.

Under the Social Issues section, I wish they would briefly connect the social issues to digital rhetoric before just throwing you into it.


 * I wish they would've put the last sentence closer to the beginning so then it can clearly connect technological diffusion to access before the example.
 * The first two sentences under online harassment need to be cited properly with studies to back up those claims.
 * Wish they would touch more on the AIs and deepfakes especially with the rapid growth in popularity in AI generated things.
 * The visual of Donald Trump's twitter account being permanently suspended is a nice visual to have but I would've also liked to see a visual of the mob that stormed the capital cause it shows the direct effect of misinformation/disinformation to real life.
 * I like that the there is a whole section about the COVID-19 pandemic as the pandemic lead to more people being online and, therefore, had a big impact on digital rhetoric as a whole and is a nice way to end the section since it sort of encapsulates a lot of social issues previously mentioned.