Annotations: Week Six

Brasseur, L. “Florence Nightingale’s Visual Rhetoric in the Rose Diagrams”

In this well-written piece, Lee Brasseur talks about “Florence Nightingale’s use of visual and verbal rhetoric in the design and presentation of her rose diagrams”. He discusses how she documented the failure of the Government and the Military in providing wounded and diseased soldiers with sanitary conditions to be housed in.

He gives a little bit of background on Ms. Nightingale, talking about how she was a born statistician, breaking societal norms, and also using statistics to dispute the claims by army doctors. I was surprised by all the background knowledge on her because I always thought that she was a nurse par excellence, but all this excited me.

Her use of the visual comparison of mortality rates in Manchester (then known for its poor mortality) versus those at the Crimean warfront was an interesting rhetorical decision, because it compares the warfront against a seemingly normal city, just to show the apathy towards the soldiers fighting the war. Brasseur considers the design of the rose diagram as unique, simply because something like that had never been done before, though Ms. Nightingale was inspired by others before her time.

The first rose diagram shows time-based as well as casualty-based progression. This, in itself, doesn’t impact the audience much, but it is telling how the casualties increased due to disease rather than the war itself. The second rose diagram shows the various causes of death, and this is a powerful representation, and this actually shows the apathetic behavior of the authorities. The third rose diagram compares mortality rates at two hospitals on the warfront versus that of a hospital in London, over a progression. This diagram is actually a solution to the problems since it shows how the casualties decreased once Ms. Nightingale’s recommended actions were taken.

Each of these rose diagrams follows a progression and complements each other. It is a form of powerful visual persuasion. All of these diagrams and the text use pathos, logic, explanations to convince the target audience. Her visual rhetorical tactics are used till today and her success was that their appeal incited action.

Florence Nightingale was one of the first successful information designers and prominent statisticians. Her approach to visual rhetoric is a triumph that has inspired many. This interesting article has made me look at visual rhetoric in a wholly positive way, and not something that adds variety to document design.

It shows me how visuals are as important as written content.

Could Florence Nightingale’s rose diagrams have been simplified even further or do you think they are easy enough to understand?

Annotations: Week Five

Johns, Lee Clark. “The File Cabinet has a Sex Life.”

In this article, Lee Clark Johns starts with how, even in today’s world, writing is very format-based. He talks about how things might be changing (or not); he essentially bases this article on the genres of technical communication.

A lot of writing students at University are taught, is academic writing. The author suggests that there is a huge need to teach students how to write professionally, since the job industry demands it. I agree with this point that Johns makes since it is so relevant to the current scenario in writing.

Johns also talks about making writers understand what the aim of writing is. He believes that making the assignments at university mirror something that happens out in the real world is a good way of making students learn what is important.

He also thinks that a focus on design and formatting would help how the document/writing looks, and that this is what is lacking in writing students. Johns says that the ultimate goal of a writer is to always make sure that the reader comprehends the information.

There are some excellent points the author makes throughout the article, though the most important thing he focuses on is the need for writing to improve from the format-based conventions we follow now to something that will help students gain a footing in the real world. He talks a lot about how writing needs to improve with regards purpose, design and content, something which is very important for technical writers. Coming from India, I see how Indians I have studied with or still live with, write, and I believe that being taught professional writing would be beneficial to them as well.

With the constraints on time in a course like TECM 2700, how do you teach writing that is not form-based?

Annotations: Week Five

Willerton, R. “Writing White Papers in High-Tech Industries: Perspectives from the Field.”

In this article, the author talks analyzes white papers through a research method and starts with the increase of white papers in the industry and backs it up with search engine data. He says that white papers convey information, but is also a promotional tool for companies.

Martha C. Sammons, in The Internet Writer’s Handbook (2003), defines a white paper as “an overview document designed to educate and inform readers on a technical topic, standard, policy issue or product.” I thought this was the most succinct definition of white papers from the article.

Like every other document that technical communicators write, the audience and purpose of white papers are the most important aspects that need to be considered.

Audience

After talking to a number of white paper writers in the industry, Russell Willerton gauges that prospective customers are the primary target of white papers. A number of candidates compete as secondary targets. The audience reads to learn, are generally skeptical of white papers and participate in selective reading. Considering how prospective customers are considered primary targets, I believe that white papers in modern times are an indication of promotional tactics.

Purpose

The purpose of white papers, according to the interviewees, is information and persuasion, to generate a strong image of the company in the eyes of the public. They are distributed through company websites, through direct email, online content syndication, email sponsorship and paid searches, other than a number of other means. I think this subtly indicates how targeted these white papers are at increasing sales.

Content

The content of these papers is very hybrid. The survey presented that it is a mix between a report, an essay and a brochure, which uses facts to persuade. White papers, in general, can be viable for 1-2 years. The experts believe it needs to be well designed, without too much color.

Creation

The author reports that the needs/questions of users need to have focus in a white paper, and that the writers should pay attention to the target audience. A number of people can contribute on white papers, including the sales and research departments.

Evaluation

The evaluation of the efficacy of a good white paper is mostly through generated quality sales leads as also through the analysis of content syndication sites. Many other evaluation ways exist, but these are the best.

I would like to conclude in place of Russell Willerton’s generic conclusion that white papers, intentionally or not, are primarily a sales pitch to the consumers, despite what the white paper writers say. They are, however, a very effective device to learn about the product, with a bit of skepticism towards the actual promotion.

Considering how the aim of white-papers is to promote (and inform), how are they very different from brochures, which also promote and inform?

Annotations: Week Four

Jansen, F. & Janssen, D. Effects of Directness in Bad News E-Mails and Voice Mails

The article talks about the differences in conveying bad news via email or voicemail  It talks about the selection of genre and the channels selected for the research in this particular article. It further discusses the effectiveness of giving explanations before the bad news than as a remedy. I believe this is down to how the reader takes the news in the first place, since this particular piece of information is quite mild.

The article also talks about how people will avoid talking about bad news in any way they can, even passing on the responsibilities to their subordinates at times. It then continues to differentiate between the channels of choice with emphasis on what is more suitable for communicating bad news. It goes on to the directness of bad news and talks about what convinces the receivers better. I don’t subscribe to directness while giving bad news as always the best tactic, since it is better to let people down gently.

Then, Jansen and Janssen talk about the method followed in their research, which includes the material, the participants, the dependent and independent variables, the design and procedure, and the manipulation checks.

Finally, they move on to the result of the research, which is similar to what they had hypothesized in the sense that emails are more comprehensible than voicemails but voicemails lead to more agreement with the receivers and give a more positive image of the sender. The result of the influence of structure is that indirect structure is evaluated as more persuasive and personal, but direct structure is more comprehensible.

The writers end with a conclusion about how these channels might have other psychological effects on the receivers and that this research should not be the definitive evidence that shows that either of these two channels are the most effective. This is worth considering since my following question actually considers looking at the psychology of every receiver.

Doesn’t psychology play a huge part in how some readers might interpret news differently over other readers? Why hasn’t that been considered?

Annotations: Week Four

Boettger, R. Wulff, S. “The Naked Truth about the Naked This: Investigating Grammatical Prescriptivism in Technical Communication”

The article by Dr. Boettger and Dr. Wulff talks about unattended this to discuss style of writings amongst students through an empirical research method. It looks at instances of explaining unattended this in how students write their papers through an analysis of sample writing sizes.

It starts with describing how certain technical writing textbooks explain correcting instances of (un)attended this. It assumes that, after some deliberation based on these books, that instances with acceptable (un)attended this do not exist.

The article talks about how technical communicators should use natural language to help readers understand and process information. I agree with this, since the main objective of technical communication is to get the message across.

The research method consisted of collecting works of 18 undergraduate students with a variety of demographic over a semester. The research found instances of this and data samples were subjected to two forms of analyses. To be honest, the research method was a bit too complicated for me to understand, but the implications of these were surprising.

The results of this method agreed with a previous article by Wulff et. al (2012) which had also found higher instances of attended this over unattended this. It also talks about the differences in language of the various demographics included in the study: gender, academic level, nativity, draft and position with regard (un)attended this.

The conclusion of this article is that (un)attended this, though not always justified, is a way for readers to understand context better and shouldn’t be vilified in so many journals about technical writing.

I agree with the conclusion regarding how unattended this might be used to better some pieces of writing because the use of this in those instances is justified. As the article mentions, the unattended this might actually be used to convey bad news, just like passive voice is. Just like passive voice isn’t always bad, (un)attended this shouldn’t be vilified.

Are there any other words like this that are considered unsuitable for frequent use by technical writing textbooks? How about their use?

Annotations: Week Three

Jones, C: The art of influence and the science of influence

The author, Colleen Jones, talks about the various tips and tricks content designers can use to influence the audience positively. She uses two means, rhetoric and psychology, to ensure that the receiver of the content gets the message in the way it was intended.

In the first chapter, she explains the rhetorical tricks any website designer should use to make sure their site has an impact on the viewer. She groups the categories of rhetorical influence as Tried-and-True Appeals (which includes credibility, logic and emotion), Irresistible Identification, Repetition That Doesn’t Bore or Broadcast and The Opportune Moment, to simplify the various stages of persuasion. In each of these stages, Jones describes every phase in detail, giving real-life examples to justify each of these phases and their application in the online world. The persuasion methods are quite effective since the examples back the claims up, and Ms. Jones seems to have a huge amount of experience in this department.

In the second chapter, Ms. Jones propounds the importance of psychology to influence the online audience. Again, she divides the phases of influence into groups to simplify understanding for the readers and explanation for herself into Framing, Metaphor, Social Proof and Reciprocity. She considers this a step forward from Rhetorical Influence and groups certain phases of influence according to the moment at which they should be applied, and the sets in which they should be applied. I believe that her use of these techniques are quite ingenious in the sense that she picks up on exactly what the audience wants and demands. She uses real-world examples even in this chapter to drive her point home.

I thought that, even though it was a long read, it was interesting because it dealt with practical aspects of designing and didn’t drone on about philosophical insights.

Can all of these techniques be applied to every website?