Social Media

• How has the online landscape transformed the dynamics of public opinion formation and communication strategies? 

The online landscape has transformed the dynamics of public opinion formation by using these platforms for the exchange of quick information, sharing of opinions, creating debates or arguments, and sharing experiences. Seeing photos, posts, and articles give us the information and the online landscape affects and sometimes decides how we see and who sees it. Algorithms play a large role in the information we see. Our communication strategies are transformed due to the style of social media. In person someone could have a lengthy and fair debate, but online and on a social media post, someone could just post a one sided comment somewhat anonymously, leading to conflicts.

In my experience, I try to stay informed about what is going on in the world, scientific discoveries, or even essential funny animal videos and usually seek out someone from my generation, or from other women in STEM fields. This is easier to navigate online, as I can search for specific people and subjects. Factors like this could have a large impact in how public opinions are formed. 

• How do the Narrative Paradigm and Gatekeeping theories apply to these platforms?

Narrative Paradigm is a theory that humans are storytellers, and relate to the world around them communication is based on storytelling. They use past experiences to make sense of the world.

Gatekeeping theory involves that information is filtered and selected information is shared with selected people. 

These two theories apply to the platforms of social media greatly. The Narrative Paradigm is apparent, since many posts are someone's opinion, experience, and story. Also, with gatekeeping, the algorithms from social media only show selected information. Once I watch many funny cat videos, then they show up constantly on my feed. These theories control the information flow because everyone is affected and certain groups will see specific posts and videos, while another group will see an entirely different post or video. 

Example: I always bring up how funny the video of Forrest Gump waving while he is on boat, it cuts over to Pennywise the Clown waving back with a severed arm. Hardly anyone knows what I am talking about and I see this video almost weekly. 

Communication Fallacies

 Examples of Fallacies

Hasty Generalization 

The example article I chose to represent hasty generalization is from Eater.com, which talks about the old Arby's commercials that would say lines about vegetarians such as:

"It may be hard to resist...even for you." and "We're giving you a number to call : 1-855-MEAT-HLP" and when you called the hotline it would give you two options, one is for vegetarians who can't stop thinking about the bacon, and the other is for vegetarians who gave in and ate bacon. The callers would hear the words "Take a deep breath...and go with the salad."

I was an assistant manager at an Arby's for 8 years, and was a vegetarian at the time. These particular commercials used to drive me crazy, mostly because I was treated lesser than because I didn't eat meat. It was mostly due to digestion issues, allergies, and health issues. Also, I never cared if anyone else did, didn't miss meat at all, and didn't just eat salads. I know they were meant to be funny but in my opinion they weren't very clever.

Hasty generalization is described as a type of fallacy that makes judgements without much evidence, a one time instance used generally, or use of stereotypes. The judgment I felt was made from generalizing people who don't eat meat want it, miss it, or can just eat salads.

Ad hominem

An article I have chosen for the ad hominem is "Ugly fake scientist. Women say sexist attacks on the rise." which is about women scientists who have been insulted and called names. The scientist named Kim Cobb, a professor of earth and atmospheric science at Georgia Tech. She recently appeared on a news program discussing the dangers of climate change. After this she was called demeaning names, and harassed by repeated phone calls and messages. 

Ad hominem is when someone is attacking their opponent personally rather than dealing with the dispute. There is usually name calling, insults, and attacks on the person instead of a respectful discussion. This is an example because scientists that are women are being personally attacked.

Female scientists say the harassment they’re enduring from men is becoming more personal, increasingly sexist and less focused on their scientific conclusions.

Female climate scientists are being targeted by men who don't accept their scientific findings.

Bandwagon 

The article I've chosen is "The doctor's choice is America's choice" which discusses the RJ Reynolds tobacco company's major advertising campaign for Camel cigarettes. It was a popular brand, and the surveys were said to be conducted by three leading independent research organizations, but were said to be from nationwide surveys of around 11,000 doctors. The statistics and numbers were advertised as facts and not a casual claim.

Bandwagon fallacies are when people jump on board to something because they think most people are doing the same thing. This is an example because the advertisements allude to large claims like it's doctor's number one choice, when they just asked a relatively small number.

Sources

• Galarza, Daniela. July 7th, 2015. Arby's Trolls Vegetarians in New Press Release. Eater. 

         https://www.eater.com/2015/7/7/8906943/arbys-trolls-vegetarians-press-release

• Waldman, Scott. Heikkinen, Niina. Aug. 21st, 2018. Ugly fake scientist. Woman say sexist attacks on the rise. E & E News.

         https://www.eenews.net/articles/ugly-fake-scientist-women-say-sexist-attacks-on-the-     rise/#:~:text=Kim%20Cobb%2C%20a%20climate%20scientist,the%20tone%20of%20her%20critics.

• Gardner, Martha N., Brandt, Allan M. The doctor's choice is America's choice." The physician in US cigarette advertisements, 1930-1953. National library of medicine.

         https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1470496/

Online Arguments

Subject of the online argument I've selected: Does Anyone Else Scientifically Think About Ghosts?

Why did you choose this online argument for your assignment? 

    I chose this online argument for my assignment because I am an avid ghost hunter and have been for most of my life. I also love science, studying science, and seek out to have legitimate experiences. The paranormal investigation methods I agree with and follow are to debunk first and foremost, critically analyze, and eliminate causes such as cars going by or someone talking outside caught on cameras or recorders for example. Theories of what ghosts are and if we can measure them are an intriguing pursuit, and its fun to see how people debate this topic. 

    As a supporter of science, it would be great to one day see a scientific study of if the supernatural is more natural than we think. Perhaps ghost are not what we have seen in our culture, or maybe they are, or it's a mix. Phantom mists captured on photos are usually moisture in the air, our minds look for faces in things (pareidolia), and strange moving lights can be bugs. On the flip side, can us as humans pick up on past feelings in a certain location, hear sounds of residual energy such as footsteps when no one is there, or can we hear disembodied voices? Does something cause this or could it be people who have passed on in another form?

Old photos I took at The Crescent Hotel in Eureka Springs, Arkansas. In one photo it seems like there is a mist, then in the next photo taken a couple of seconds later, has no mist. 

An old photo of me with something in the background. All that was behind me was a brick wall. What do you see?

   

Other examples of pareidolia.

Provide three negative examples and concerns you have with this online argument.

Here are quotes taken from the Reddit threat.

1. "Off topic but if I ever see a home priced at significantly below market value I should ask if any baggage comes along with the purchase."

2. "Stop waiting for science. They turn their information over to the military and use it against you."

3.  "My problem here is how people exaggerate."

I'm concerned with 1 because it's a little off topic and the word baggage seems reductive. With 2, their response seems biased and assumptive. I've talked to many scientists and they say they support sharing knowledge with all and science is for everyone. With 3, seems judgmental and dismissive.

Create five rules for how people should argue online more constructively.

1. Don't be dismissive and judgmental of others.

2. Research both sides of the argument.

3. Listen to others opinions with respect.

4. Always try to be open minded.

5. Be kind even if you don't agree with someone.

Link to the Reddit  post: 

https://www.reddit.com/r/Paranormal/comments/1npauxn/does_anyone_else_scientifically_think_about_ghosts/

Blog Post on a Business's Online Communication

 The business I've chosen is Penguin Random House Publishing.

I chose them because I am a short horror fiction writer and hope to one day publish novels with a large publishing company. 

Does the company do a good job communicating on its website and social media platforms? Provide examples. 

Yes, I think Penguin Random House does a good job at communicating on their website and social media platforms. Their company website is thorough, with so many links such as their about us section, quick links, help, and connect. They are organized and use headlines such as "22 Must-Read Horror Books" and "24 Recommendations If You Love" on their Instagram page. They suggest new releases and shop your next book with categories such as new releases, coming soon, best-sellers, and award winners. 

On the company website, what is featured at the top, in the middle, and at the bottom of the home page? Why do you think they have it organized this way? In your opinion, is it effective? 

On the company website, on top is the company logo, with a clear description of what their company is. They have organized categories that are easy to understand such as books, kids, popular, authors & events, recommendations, and audio. In the middle are many large photos of their new and popular releases, with attention grabbing designs. It shows what is out now and in the spotlight. Many categories of books are featured such as "Must-Read Books by Indigenous Authors" and regularly updated recommendations. On the bottom of the page are easy links containing answers to frequently asked questions, links to all their social media, and how to contact them with email or customer service. This is very organized in my opinion and easy to navigate. Yes, this is effective because it's simple but eye catching at the same time. The organization is effective and makes me want to explore their online presence more.

Does the business communicate an identity online? Provide examples. 

Yes, this business communicates an online identity by always providing links to it's other online presences. On their company website they have their links to Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest, Facebook, etc. 

Where could the company improve its online communication?   

They could improve their online communication by maybe adding a section for aspiring authors with what they are looking for with future signed authors. They could add some tips from the publisher about what they wish for and common submission mistakes. Also, where to send in story pitches and maybe a history of how the process has worked for best-selling authors in the early stages.

Link to their website https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/

Podcast Research

 Which podcast did you choose to listen to and why? 

The podcast I chose to listen to is the Haunted Objects Podcast with Greg and Dana Newkirk. I chose this podcast because I have been an active listener for years, and a member of their Museum of the Paranormal. They are available on Spotify and have a second podcast just for their Patreon members. This podcast takes a deep dive into the paranormal, haunted objects, and the history of all things weird. They deep dive into subjects such as The Mothman, haunted scrying mirrors, The Area 51 crash, and paranormal technology.

A photo I took at The Mothman festival in Point Pleasant, WV.

How did the host's delivery (pitch, pauses, rate of speaking, and volume) impact the overall effectiveness of the podcast? 

The hosts are Greg and Dana Newkirk, and have a few great people who give presentations and commentary along with them named Connor, Karl, and Keelan. Their rate of speaking and volume are great for me and how I learn, due to the fact that they are clear, consistent, loud enough to hear but not overly loud or too stimulating. They all take turns and give clear and easy to understand comments. I find this podcast comforting and enjoyable to listen to, as well as the content being educational. 

Was a podcast the best way to communicate this information, or would a video presentation have been more effective?

Yes, I would say a podcast was the best way to communicate this information. This podcast is more like a lecture, full of education information, history, methods, with points of view from the skeptical side and believer side. A video presentation could be effective if they were to show photos for reference, but overall they described items and sceneries very well.

Photo of the scrying mirror and crying boy painting behind it. Taken at The Haunted Objects Podcast live show I went to in 2024.

Who/what was the intended audience for this podcast? 

The intended audience for this podcast are paranormal enthusiasts, ghost hunters, and people who enjoy learning about strange history. I would say primarily the X generation and millennials, due to some of the references. Also, people who grew up watching the paranormal/ ghost hunting shows, or anyone who would go out to haunted roads or places with friends to to have some spooky fun. Possibly younger generations would enjoy learning about cultural canon of the time, such as how big The Mothman was in the 1960s or the Crying Boy paintings of the 1980s. I would recommend this podcast to anyone who enjoys learning about paranormal and fun weird topics in detail. Greg, Dana, and crew do a wonderful job in teaching thoroughly researched credible information. They are always objective, fair, positive, and use humor as a fun pairing to serious topics.

A photo from the Haunted Objects Podcast live tour I went to in 2024. This is Greg and Dana Newkirk hosting. 

Prensky's and Kirschner's Research

 Prensky and Kirschner have written about two sides to the concept of an immigrant/native approach to learning and technology's role in how a generation learns. Prensky believes that a group of people raised without the presence of technology and a younger group who were always around technology, do learn differently and essentially speak different languages to each other. Kirschner's approach is that this isn't true, and there is no such thing as a digital native or immigrant who is more skilled and informed just because they were more or less exposed to technology. 

According to Prensky, what category do you fall into, and how has this affected your learning?

I say that I could fall into the digital native mostly, and possibly the first part of my life as a digital immigrant. I remember a time when we did not have a computer or anything highly technical, no internet, and just a landline phone. I was born in 1988 and remember maybe around the second grade going to a computer lab and seeing a computer for the first time. Most of our class time we did not have access to computers and would go to the separate lab maybe once a day or a few times a week, where we would play learning games, and the occasional Oregon Trail. 

This has affected my learning by making my brain a little quicker when it comes to computers. I'm still not the best with computers, and taking online classes within the past 4 years have greatly improved my skills. Although, I do better with reading physical books as opposed to reading something digital.

What are some other myths Kirschner associated with Prensky's findings from 2001? 

Some myths that Kirschner associate with Prensky's findings are that digital natives are naturally good multitaskers and do better with technology. These statements really have not much evidence proving this, and just because someone grew up with technology doesn't mean they are always good at multitasking or savvy when it comes to computers. I'd say I fall in the category of not being very technically skilled but grew up mostly with computers around. 

Sources

• Prensky, M. R. (2012). From digital natives to digital wisdom : Hopeful essays for 21st century learning. Corwin Press.
• Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135–142.

Interpersonal Relationships

My notes and descriptions on the Knapp's Relational Model.

The interpersonal relationship I've chosen to analyze with through Knapp's Relational Model is a coworker of mine that I have worked with for close to three years. Starting out on my first day at this new job, she was training me, our first impressions of each other were pretty rocky, and we couldn't quite get a good read on each other. We talked in a formal way with each other, but I started to sense a negative attitude and an anger coming from her when I would ask questions while I was training.

The section in our reading titled We Cling to First Impressions,  they talk about the halo effect and horns effect, where the halo effect is after having a positive interaction and seeing them in a positive way, and horns effect seeing them in a negative way. (Adler, Proctor. 2023) After the initial negative first impressions, I struggled at work greatly for a long time. Dealing with passive aggressive comments, angry snaps, and being left alone to figure out the job on my own. I would say we started out with the Initiating stage of the Knapp's Relational Model, moved to Experimenting, but maybe jumped right to avoiding, since we steered clear of each other even though we had to work in the same place. 

After around a year, we started talking more and I think we bonded on some of our shared on the job issues, like dealing with another employee who made us laugh, and having to carry heavy things up flights of stairs together. We continued in the Experimenting phase, then to Intensifying. After that we moved to Integrating, where we eat lunch and go on the occasional shopping trip together after work.

Finally. we began to bond and realize we had so much in common. Now this person is a good work friend of mine, and we talk through our issues instead of Avoiding them or each other. I have decided to keep this friendship separate from close personal friends and just at work and occasional shopping trip. This boundary has worked well, and when applied to this model, would keeping that friendship boundary of just a work friend be considered Differentiating or Circumscribing? Since Differentiating is more about taking separate individual time, or Circumscribing is about restricted conversations, like I don't talk to her about group gatherings or include her in group chats.

How have the impacts of online communication affected your interpersonal relationship?

I did add this person on Facebook and Instagram. We like each others photos and message memes to each other but that is the extent. I don't share much information about me online, just photos on Instagram. This online communication is mostly normal with minimal interactions. Since I keep this work friendship separate, it can be hard to be online if I don't want her to see my photos of me hosting or going to events she isn't invited to. We do seem to have a mutual understanding that she isn't invited to things I have going on and she never seems bothered, but I do feel guilty sometimes because I don't want to leave anyone out. On the other hand we have separate friend groups and that is totally ok. So when online, sometimes I don't post everything I do or share my locations or tag people just to keep some privacy. 

Reference

• Adler, R. B, & Proctor, R. F.ll. (2023). Interplay: The process of interpersonal communication (16th edition). Oxford University Press. Chapter 5, Perceiving Others, pg. 135-136.