SWA 4

In today’s modern, computer based society, it has become easier and easier for everyday people to post essays of opinion on the internet. Anyone can create an account or an alter-ego at various blogging and social networking website, such as Blogspot and Facebook. On these sites people can post how they feel about certain rhetoric situations, which requires taking a position or viewpoint on a debated or argued topic. Two examples of online rhetoric situations are David Friedman's blog "Ideas,” and a classmate from my high school’s facebook page.
Both websites share some things in common, however are very different. The first clear cut difference is the type of text. Friedman’s article “Low Cost Cooling” is a short blog in which the author gives an obvious alternative to air conditioning units which society for the most part has ignored. My classmate’s facebook page has a section in her “Notes” in which she discusses her feelings about coming out, and how she does not care how other people view her as a result of it. These are two very different text sources to write about. One involves an environmental alternative, the other an alternative lifestyle. However both texts aim to stimulate discussion and encourage change. One wants a more fuel and cost efficient source of cooling, the other to encourage tolerance among her peers. Both have similar cores that inspired the author to write them.
These two articles also have very different targeted audiences, authors, and constraints. Friedman intended for his piece to be read by homeowners; both those having difficulties with cooling and those who use air conditioners and may want an alternative. My classmate intended for basically everyone she was “friends” with on facebook to see and read it. The author of the first piece is a professor with a background in economics, while my classmate is merely a confused teenager possibly trying to find herself. Finally, the Friedman article is constrained by the idea that the newest technology belongs in homes even if it may not by the best alternative, and those who may not have the luxury of this low cost cooling. This includes, for example, people who do not receive much of a cross breeze by their home. My classmate’s facebook post is constrained by the conservative, homophobic viewpoint that this alternate lifestyle makes you an outcast in society and results in a shunning by many of your peers. Though she wrote it without this opinion in mind, it is still a constriction that will influence reader’s opinions.
Though both authors had different exigencies for writing their internet articles, they still share some similarities. Friedman wrote his out of disgust for people committed to air conditioning units when there is a much more cost and environmentally efficient way to cool buildings found in nature. My classmate wrote hers as a coming out statement. She did it to inform others of her decision and that she did not care how they felt about it. These are two very different situations that signal a problem in the author’s life. However both were written to inform their readers of the opinions, and to let the internet world know something about the way they felt. These are just a few similarities and differences from two of the billions of rhetoric situations found on the World Wide Web today.