About the Author

Bay VanWagenen graduated from California State University, Sacramento in 2013 with a Master's degree in English Composition. She currently teaches in the Merritt Writing Program at the University of California, Merced. Her research interests include genre studies, digital literacies, and first-year composition.

Contents

Introduction

Methodology Part 1

Students' Knowledge of Audience

Picturing an Audience

Managing an Audience

Managing an Audience (cont.)

Students' Knowledge of Genre

Facebook Genre Content

Blogging Genre Conventions

Blogging Genre Conventions (cont.)

Students' Knowledge of Purpose

Students' Knowlegde of Purpose (cont.)

Conclusion: Embracing Digital Literacies

Works Cited

Introduction

In “Becoming Literate in the Information Age: Cultural Ecologies and the Literacies of Technology,” Cynthia Selfe and Gail Hawisher (2004) issue a call for writing instructors to incorporate a range of literacies into their classroom. They write:

 Writing instructors . . . face the danger of teaching in ways that ignore the considerable strengths in technological literacies that some students bring to our classes. As a result, we fail to build on the literacies that students already have – and we fail to learn about these literacies or why they seem so important to so many students. We also fail, as we deny the value of these new literacies, to recognize ourselves as illiterate in some spheres. And in this intellectual arrogance, we neglect to open ourselves to learning new literacies that could teach us more about human discursive practices. (p. 676)

This call from Selfe and Hawisher made nearly a decade ago has been taken up by many compositionists seeking to build on students’ literacies, particularly digital literacies. New digital technologies have transformed literacy practices and allow greater opportunities for students to write to and be read by global audiences. Writing teachers face a “new, ‘digital’ imperative, one that asks how we can reshape our pedagogy with new uses of the technologies that are changing our personal and professional lives” (Clark, 2010, p. 28). In regard to students writing in a “newly technologized, socialized, and networked” writing environment, Kathleen Yancey (2009) reminds us that “these students know how to compose, and they know how to organize and they know audience. How can we build on all that knowledge? How can we help them connect it to larger issues?” (p. 330). To prepare students as they attempt to navigate this changing professional and social environment, it would benefit educators to broaden their appreciation and understanding of the technological literacies of their students in order for writing instruction to be more meaningful and relevant. Doing so involves more than teaching with technology; it requires teachers to learn from their students’ literacies as an important step in making connections between students’ digital knowledge and academic writing, helping students understand how the literacies required in school are connected to and can build from their self-sponsored literacies.

Recent scholarship has identified a need for learning how digital practices can best be used in the writing classroom. J. Elizabeth Clark (2010) argues for a “pedagogy aimed at furthering students’ digital literacy” (p. 27). She believes “the composition classroom should immerse students in analyzing digital media, in exploring the world beyond the classroom, in crafting digital personae, and in creating new and emerging definitions of civic literacy” (p. 28). The New London Group (2000) believes teachers should design curriculum that draws upon multiple voices, “languages, discourses and registers” as “resource[s] for learning” instead of ignoring differences and teaching literacy as a fixed ideal” (p.18). Among these resources are students’ digital literacies. The New London Group recognizes that new technologies have altered literacy expectations and implores “educators [to] take a lead in developing appropriate pedagogies for these new electronic media and forms of communication” (p. 71). New digital pedagogies would benefit from incorporating students’ digital practices in their design.

About the Author

Amber McDonnell is a second-year master's student in Auburn University's technical and professional communication program. Her principal academic interests are rhetoric and ethics in new media. Additionally, she teaches English composition as a graduate assistant and enjoys finding ways to incorporate new media in the classroom. When she isn't attending class or teaching, she enjoys taking photos, cooking, and playing with her rescue dog, Eddie.

Contents

Introduction

Methods

Scenario

Scenario (Cont.)

Analysis: Visual Rhetoric

Analysis: Ethical Scope

Analysis: Ethical Theories

Discussion

Conclusion

Works Cited

Introduction

Visual rhetoric is both a powerful and complex tool available to most technical communicators in their area(s) of work. Images, charts, graphs, maps, and other inscriptions yield great influence over an audience in technical illustrations, technical manuals, web documents, print documents, and many other arenas. The power and influence of visuals, partnered with their unavoidable presence in our daily lives, make them an effective tool across disciplinary boundaries. With such power, visuals present the risk of, all too easily, swaying their audiences in an unethical fashion. The use and misuse of visual rhetoric seems, at first, to be a simple case for decision-makers (if a visual is used dishonestly, then it is unethical). However, the complicated nature of visuals, their subject matter, their interpretations, and their influence present a challenge for those who employ such representations in their work.

An example of the power and influence created by visual rhetoric lies in BP’s public response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill that occurred in April 2010. The multinational, multibillion-dollar oil and gas company was faced with a public relations and risk communication crisis after a methane gas explosion (and consequent wellhead blowout) caused one of their contracted oilrigs to sink in the Gulf of Mexico. Rather than choosing against photographic coverage of their response efforts, the company chose to alter several photographs using photo manipulation software in order to bolster their public image. Their audience included journalists, scientists, families of the explosion victims, people living in the affected area, and anyone with a television and cable connection as the whole world turned to BP for answers in the wake of the largest accidental oil spill of all time. Due to the poor quality of the photo manipulations, the alterations first became clear to attorney and AmericaBlog founder John Aravosis and Gizmodo editor-in-chief Brian Barrett. After their blog posts were published on the issue, media outlets like CBS News and the Washington Post, and consequently the whole world, became interested in BP’s decision to use photo manipulation software to doctor photos.

I would like to specify here what I mean by “alterations” and the “manipulation” of photographs. Photographs and other visual representations are mediated both by human and mechanical means. Photos, for instance, are mediated by the camera’s technical capabilities and the photographer’s manipulation of such capabilities. In this way, reality is translated differently depending on: technical capabilities like photo quality (or resolution) and focal length of a camera (how far the lens can zoom in or out); and the photographer’s method of framing the shot (including or excluding objects from the frame) and manipulating the camera’s settings, such as shutter speed, aperture, and white balance. Therefore, photographers, in a sense, create what their audience perceives as reality. By way of such mediation, reality is already a complicated concept when attempting to convey “truth” in an image. However, when you add photo manipulation software to the mix, reality and truth become even more complex.

What the BP case offers to the technical communicator is a deeper look into an ethical issue that many will find relevant to their own work. While it is easy to point the finger at the corporate giant, we must take a critical look at the scenario, taking ethical and rhetorical theory into account, to better understand the effect that public and corporate pressure have on those conducting technical work. This case study will attempt to confront and complicate what seems to be a simple ethical dilemma by reviewing literature on ethical and rhetorical theory relevant to visuals, analyzing BP’s manipulated photos in connection with the pressure the company’s executives (and contracted employees) were under, and applying this knowledge to the decision-making process in order to draw a more coherent and thoughtful conclusion on BP’s actions. This study will also draw exigence from the fact that BP is due to undergo the third phase (the penalty phase) of its federal criminal case in January 2015. 

About the Author

Mary K. Stewart is a PhD candidate in the School of Education at UC Davis, where she is pursuing an emphasis in Language, Literacy, and Culture, and a designated emphasis in Writing, Rhetoric, and Composition Studies. Her dissertation research focuses on the ways first-year composition instructors design collaborative activities (namely small group discussion and peer review) in computer-assisted, hybrid, and online environments. Find her website at MaryKStewart.com 

Contents

Home

Invention

Digital Literacy

Methods

Practicing Invention

Teaching Invention

The Next Step

References

Home

A repository of online invention resources available on university writing center websites, this web resource offers writing instructors and writing program administrators an overview of available resources and an explanation of why using such resources to teach invention promotes digital literacy.

If you are looking for INFORMATION about. . .

• ... the relationship between invention and digital literacy, read Invention and Digital Literacy.
• ... the methods used to select the resources on this site, read Methods.
• ... how you can contribute to the future development of this project, read The Next Step. 
• ... the academic resources that influenced this site, read References. 

If you are looking for APPLICATIONS of this information, please visit...

• ... Practicing Invention, which describes specific activities you can assign to your students.
• ... Teaching Invention, which contains example discussion prompts and links to resources.

Note: to view the essay in its original form, click here.

Abstract

The Enron scandal of the early 2000s is perhaps the most publicized occurrence of corporate fraud in recent decades, and it had impactful consequences: not only did the company's scandal and resulting prosecution lead to the dissolution of Enron Corporation and the sentencing of several C-level executives, it also sparked a major reform in financial regulation by way of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The Enron collapse and its legislative fallout raise questions about how effectively financial regulation addresses ethical concerns in the marketplace. This analysis will explore these questions through the application of Aristotelian virtue ethics, deontological ethics, and the contractarianism approach to ethical egoism. While no single methodology provides a clear solution to addressing corporate fraud, these theories help shed light on the design and success of current regulatory responses. Analysis will center on one particular piece of legal legislature that received significant press attention during Enron's criminal investigation. 18 U. S. Code Section 1346 states that it is a felony to "deprive another of honest services," and it was according to this definition that former Enron CEO Jeffry Skilling was found guilty of fraud (Casey, 2010, p. 1). Analysis of this "honest services clause," ethical systems in corporate environments, and post-Enron legal regulation reveals that while increasing punishments for noncomplying entities may seem like an appropriate way to deter corporate fraud, it cannot fully address the concerns of market shareholders and stakeholders.