One of the disadvantages of the internet is that everyone's opinions can be heard.
My grad-level Theory of Exposition course has spent a lot of focus on the truth--defining it, explaining it, reading other people's opinions of it. But those definitions and explanations are written by educated people, who know how to use grammar and syntax properly. They state their opinion, back it with facts, and cite other theorists and philosophers to reinforce their statements. But in the day and age of the internet, people don't always do that. Anyone with an internet connection can start a blog, can post of a forum, can upload a video to YouTube. There are dozens of ways to make yourself heard. And there are dozens of ways to have your opinions discredited.
In the journals and articles we've read, exposition theorists who disagree with one another cite other works, other philosophers, and keep things relatively civil. (And by civil, I mean Plato never bluntly told Aristotle to die in a fire.) But things are different now, especially when it comes to online exposition. There are no rules online; anything goes and disagreements degenerate into schoolyard taunts. But does that mean there's no truth behind what individuals are expressing? Does that mean their opinions aren't valid because they weren't able to express themselves clearly?
Here's a good example: a couple of years ago, the game "Super PSTW Action RPG" debuted on the website NewGrounds.com, a flash-driven website that allows people to upload their own animations and video games. People loved the game.
Well, most people loved the game.
One person, who went by the name axman13, was very critical of it. Here's his review:
"...
i reley dont wan to say this, but i have to now.
this game is so esey. i mean, all you do is hit the spacebar. thats it! how is this an RPG anyway? you cant contrail anything but what it says on the screen! what if i didnt want to buy the potion? what apout quests? all you can upgrade is stranth? there is no way you can lose to the boss at the end! this game is crap! its not even an RPG at all! i mean look at it! in what way is this supposed to be an RPG if you can do quests and stuff? all you do is press one butten the entier time! explain to me! the athore coments al totol lies! is it supposed to be stick dudes? i dont even know how this damn game got the daily 3rd prize, or a rating of 4.26!
pepole think this review is worthles.
go ahead! say it! i dont care! im just trying to make a point here!
blam this piece of crap!!!!
P.S the only reson im giving this a 1 is beacuase the voices where pretty good. but thats it!"
axman13's review has since been deleted. Why? Because he wasn't being truthful? Because he wasn't making valid arguments?
Or because axman13's syntax wasn't perfect, nor did he didn't articulate his argument, which made him an "esey" target?
Shortly after axman13's review was posted, a rebuttal of sorts was created, which mocks and invalidates axman13's opinion (the original video can be found here):
Are you laughing? I did. This video is hilarious in its over-the-topness. Other people think so, too.
SenorCoolguy writes: "This is such a totally awesome flash toon. It really captured to unintended essence of axman13's review. As a matter of fact, at this point, this cartoon of a review for a game is rated EVEN HIGHER than the game itself. Great job!"
brynimation writes: "This video is absolutely fantastic! It made me and my whole family literally pee our selfs with laughter. And the review by the user is stupid to a whole new level. Literally every single line has a spelling mistake! It is just fantastic. Congratulations. You have created a master piece."
Twilightrogue writes: "Hahaha-W-wait-haha...whew.
This is great! I was laughing so hard, I had to watch it twice to get it all. The screen effects really promote the feeling of the flash and the voice was spot on. The way certain words are stressed and other words are rushed through really throws it all at the viewer at once, in a good way.
Also, as an English major and fellow user of the internet, I salute you for this flash. Very entertaining."
Why are we so quick to discredit someone because they fail at rhetoric? On the other hand, what makes people think they can be taken seriously if they don't take the time to review their own writing? Let's pretend for a second that axman13's review was correctly spelled, and did use proper syntax. Would that make his review anymore credible? Or would he still fall victim of the internet's unforgiving nature?
And those reviews of the mock video: Were they any better than axman13's? Are they more credible because they were (for the most part) grammar-error free?
I think there is truth behind what people are expressing, and they may be valid to the particular person. And by truth, I mean that the people making the statement feel like they are making valid statements. However, people feel like they can say anything online. And depending on the person’s education and background, the person may come off as ignorant and/or offensive. I don’t think people would be so open if they had to say it to someone’s face. Perhaps that’s why Plato never bluntly told Aristotle to die in a fire :)
ReplyDeleteI don't remember these last questions when I responded the first time, or maybe I'm losing my mind this late in the semester. I'm more forgiving of grammar mistakes than I am of offensive comments. Some people are just so mean and heartless, and these are the people I don't take seriously. Of course these are the comments that get the most responses out of people, so maybe the person hasn't failed completely at rhetoric.
DeleteI think that we do tend to believe a well written response over one that is less well written. It comes across as being more credible, or better researched, or something.... I'm not really sure why, but I guess we think that more time went into it. However, it may very well be a disservice to someone who has a highly thought out argument, but did not do well in school, or is perhaps from another country and their grammar is not very well developed, even if their argument is.
ReplyDeleteI don’t know where this discrimination came in, but I think that it has a lot to do with our sense of who is an “expert” in their field, and what constitutes a credible source. We have always tended to favor the educated in our society. We see them as tending to adhere to a higher standard, and are often shocked when they slip up in ways that we see as belonging to lesser strata of breeding, education, or what have you.
I know I’m guilty of it myself. I have a friend who supposedly has an English degree, and is always telling me how annoyed she gets when she sees things that are grammatically incorrect. Yet if you look at what she writes, she obviously either does not take the time to proofread a single thing she posts, or maybe she’s just not as good at it as some. Either way, when I read some of her arguments for or against something I do have a tendency to discredit it in my mind based on the way that it is written. And she doesn’t come across this way in person. It is only in writing.
I don’t think that the way something is written necessarily makes it more credible, but it does tend to be seen that way because of our tendency to favor the educated. In theory, the more educated you are, the better you are at critical thinking, and therefore your arguments are better thought out, researched, etc. I think this is how we unconsciously try to weed out the information that we see as inaccurate or unworthy in some manner. I also think that we do it to sort of validate certain ways of thinking, writing, etc. Sort of like setting an industry standard for criticism.
I completely agree. I work with undergraduate graduation candidates a lot, mostly through email. I'm sure these students are brilliant and will go on to be successful in their fields, but it still annoys me when they can't spell words correctly when they're asking me questions, or have no sense of punctuation or syntax. More than once I've stared at the screen and thought, "And you want me to give you a diploma?"
DeleteI don't know if it's always okay, though, to judge someone by their grammar (or lack their of) skills all the time, but, like you said, when it comes to deeming someone an expert, I think it's important to know your "theres" and "yours".