My E-Portfolio!

Introduction to My E-Portfolio
On this site, you will find examples of the work I have completed so far in my college career.  This website will be updated as I progress through college to portray my best work to date.  At the moment, you will find an essay, a speech, and a few blog posts which I have completed throughout my first year at Penn State.  As I dwell into the next few years of my college career, more examples of my literary work will be added in order to portray an updated and current view of my writing and speaking abilities.

Prior to my Spring 2012 semester, I did not have very much experience with rhetoric and its overwhelming presence in everything we do.  However, upon entry into the Rhetoric and Civic Life class that I took during that semester, it became clear that rhetoric, if used effectively, can drastically improve your writing and speaking skills.  More importantly, I have learned how important ethos, pathos, and logos are in writing and speaking.  With this knowledge, I believe I am beginning to develop the ability to apply these rhetorical skills to my work in a way that clarifies and strengthens my overall message.

Michael Interdonato's E-Portfolio

Gary Hamel's Presentation Style

Recently, I had to do a project for my Management class in which my group discussed "skills" of organizations. A key component when talking about skills is an idea called "core competencies."  Core competencies are essentially the core skills of a business or organization that differentiate that business or organization from its competitors.  Core competencies were developed by two men, one of whom goes by the name of Gary Hamel.  Upon doing research on Hamel for this project, I found videos of presentations he has done on management related topics and in most of them, he used a very unique presentation style.

In class on Wednesday, we went over various presentation styles and one of those styles was the Lessig style.  Immediately when we went over this, I thought of Hamel's presentation.  Hamel's is much more appealing and slightly more complex  Nonetheless it seemed to be a variation of the Lessig style.  Above, I posted a video of a presentation Hamel did as part of the Phoenix Lecture series about "the dead hand of tradition holding us back" and restricting us from change.  I would recommend taking a look at the video because not only will it allow you to understand what I am saying, but it is also pretty cool.

The words displayed on the screen behind him are words that Hamel is saying and they are displayed as he says them.  This technique seems to be very useful.  It helps develop logos as you listen to the speaker.  Hamel is very a good speaker as well which helps, but the words flashing on the screen almost make it seem like everything Hamel is saying is true.  You hear him say it and then you see on the screen which, at least for me, makes the presentation very compelling.  All in all, I've found that this Lessig style of presenting really does work if done right.  It has some subtle rhetorical effects on you and makes the viewer more prone to understanding and believing the message.

Pranav Mistry's Sixth Sense

Pranav Mistry

With my recent blog posts, I have started to become extremely interested in TED talks.  Mistry begins his TED talk by talking about his earlier inventions.  First off, he discusses his invention "Quickies" which are essentially intelligent Post-It Notes.  These notes are connected to your computer and as you write on them, the information is transferred to your computer.  The notes can also be synced with your phone, sent as texts, or answered if they are in question form.  When writing a question, the answer can be printed out after the computer reads what the question is.  In addition to "Quickies", Mistry invented a pen which can draw in 3D.  It uses cameras and receivers to see which what the pen is drawing and it shows up on  computer screen in 3D.  This can be helpful for architects.  Finally, Mistry moves on to his newest, and in my opinion coolest, invention.

Sixth Sense was originally developed as a bike helmet with a camera and projector on it which could read these colored tips that Mistry would put on his fingers.  With this, he is able to interact with the digital world and move around objects in a way that reminds me of the movie "Minority Report".  The color markers on your fingers are recognized by the camera which allow you to do things with objects and zoom in and out by pinching your fingers much like you would on your phone's touch screen.  He also wants to begin to use Sixth Sense in order to take pictures without using a camera.  Just by making a rectangular shape with your hands as if you were taking a fake picture, the picture would actually be taken and saved on your camera.  Then, you can view these pictures on any wall and edit them and send them to people.  Also, you can use things like your palm as a surface to project numbers and dial a phone number on your palm.

Mistry goes on to describe how Sixth Sense can be used to be show you information regarding objects you are holding in your hands.  For instance, he uses Sixth Sense to look at a book and then once the invention recognizes the book, it projects text reviews, sound reviews, and other info about the book.  Also, on a newspaper, you can video of events that occurred and also you can see live weather projected over a map on the paper.  There are other uses that he describes like reading an airline ticket and it projects whether the flight is on time, delayed, or cancelled.  The things that Sixth Sense can potentially do are endless and I found this invention to be absolutely amazing.

A 12 Year Old App Developer

DOGOnews

To continue with the subject matter that I discussed last week, Thomas Suarez is another very young individual who has accomplished pretty impressive things in his short life.  He has programmed multiple apps for Apple's operating system (iOS).  I personally cannot do that at all.  I did take an introductory programming class for Microsoft Visual Basic my freshman year of high school, but the best thing I was able to do by the end of that class was make a very simple and pretty bad version of the game "Snake."  I also could only do that because our teacher laid out the directions to the point that it barely required thought.  Granted at the time, I thought it was awesome that I made a game, but I have since come to learn that Suarez, who is only 12, is able to make fully functioning apps that are available on the app store.

Suarez spoke in a TED convention in which he made a very good point.  He said that it is very easy for kids to learn how to play the violin or play soccer because the resources in order to do that are very accessible and available.  However, a kid with the aspirations that Suarez had, which was to learn programming and make games, may not be able to find the necessary resources in order to do that.  Apple released a development kit which Suarez began to familiarize himself with and make test apps.  One of these test apps, called Earth Fortune, he later released in the app store.

Suarez, like Taylor Wilson who I discussed last week, is helping to persuade kids like him that they can truly do whatever they want to do with their lives.  Also, there is no reason that they cannot do something just because they are kids.  There is truly nothing that can limit or prevent you from going after your goals and enjoying your life.  Suarez definitely promotes civic engagement as well in that he is promoting the pursuit of programming.  He also spoke about using clubs like the one he started in his school where he can help other students and teach them about what he has done with creating apps.  He wants to ensure that the resources are available for students that are interested in the topic.

I found Suarez's Ted talk to be extremely interesting and inspiring and as I mentioned last week, I find that young kids' success stories are very moving to me.  It is amazing that he was able to do what he has done in his short twelve years of life.

The World's Youngest Nuclear Scientist

The White House

Taylor Wilson is the world's youngest nuclear scientist.  He constructed a working nuclear fusion reactor in his home at the age of 14.  Since then he built radiation detectors at the age of 17 for Homeland Security which cost 100s of dollars.  The reason that this is so significant is that the previous detectors that they had cost 100s of thousands of dollars.  He later presented these detectors and the research that he did with Homeland Security to President Barack Obama.  Upon first hearing all of this, I was amazed.  I found it hard to believe that a kid could not only build, but successfully build a nuclear fusion reactor at age 14.  Just the fact that it is a fusion reactor is simply amazing in that fusion reactors have not been perfected for use as an energy source.  All of the nuclear power plants in use are fission reactors.  I know that personally, I would have no idea where to begin to build a fusion reactor.

But what does this have to do with rhetoric or civic engagement?  I think a kid like this can and will persuade other kids to take the initiative to follow their dreams just like Wilson.  He is an example for kids throughout the world that you do not have to be above a certain age in order to do something amazing and make a difference in the world.  I think in this sense, Wilson is able to promote civic engagement in our youth.

I don't know about you, but hearing stories of success of kids is always very inspiring in my opinion.  It makes me personally want to strive to do more with my life.  There is always more that you can do to better your chances of doing something great with your life and kids like Taylor are the reason that I have come to realize that.  Do you feel that stories like this have a strong effect on you as well?

The Filter Bubble

Brain Pickings

I came across this idea while researching for topics for a media project that I had to do for the very class I have to write this blog for.  I was browsing on TED and found a video about "The Filter Bubble."  This is an idea that was developed by Eli Pariser that I found to be very interesting. It is basically the idea that the internet can essentially cater to our interests.  Things like Google use information like previous pages that we have clicked on or our past search history in order to show us results that it thinks we want to see.  It creates a filter bubble of information effectively eliminating opposing or different views on a similar subject from our lives.  The first ten results that I see when I type in "Michael Vick" on Google could be completely different from the first ten results that you see.

The reason that I found this idea to be so interesting is that it is basically serving to discourage civic engagement.  By withholding new and different ideas from us, we only get to see one side of things.  This would prevent people from ever questioning their opinions or even realizing that there are other opinions out there.  Unless we are exposed to every side of any subject matter, we can not effectively speak and raise our voice on that matter.  In order to be good citizens, it is our job to speak our opinion.  However, the filter bubble idea makes you think whether or not you are actually speaking your own opinions.  You may just be speaking what Google thinks is your opinion.   The filter bubble has also been discussed with regard to Facebook in that Facebook has been criticized for allegedly filtering or personalizing what you see on your news feed.

All in all, I think this idea that Pariser has developed is something that you should keep in the back of your mind.  I don't think anybody wants the internet to create our opinions and views for us and therefore, we have to make sure that this does not happen.  What do you think about the filter bubble?

The Effect of Nice Weather

Fuel Your Writing

While this may be a silly topic to discuss, the weather has a way of persuading us to do certain things and to become engaged as citizens.  This past week the weather has been amazing, especially for this time of the year, and everyone seems to be loving it.  There are more people outside relaxing, playing sports, and just walking around.

However, the weather does more than just get people outside.  It convinces them to do things like go to class.  I don't know about you, but lately it has been clear that more people have been going to class.  In all of the lecture hall classes that I have, it is very noticeable that more people are going.  This is just an assumption, but I'm sure the weather has something to do with that.  I just find it interesting that weather can have such a persuasive effect on us.  When it is rainy and cold, some students do not go which suggests that the benefit or value they get from going to class does not outweigh the annoyance of walking through the rain in the cold.  However, on a nice sunny day, the value of class does outweigh anything else they could be doing with their time.

In this respect, "weather" can be considered to be a talented rhetorician.  Obviously, that is a bit of stretch, but the effect weather has on people cannot be overlooked.  All in all, it is just amazing that people make decisions like going to classes that cost a ton of money based on the weather.

On another note, enjoy the weather while it lasts (which is hopefully forever).  Personally, I just feel happier when it is nice out and I love being outside.  Are you the same way?  Do you find that weather affects any of the decisions you make?

The Price of Fa$ebook

iTechVision

If you were to ask pretty much anyone if Facebook costs anything, they would say no.  The conventional person knows that it is technically free to use for everyone.  However, this is not necessarily true.  While, it is free in terms of money, that is not the case in another sense.  Each and every person that signs up for Facebook is selling their personal information.  Therefore, the true price of Facebook is your value of personal information.  The exigence present regarding this idea is a very interesting topic.

Most people consider Facebook to be amazing tool and I would have to agree.  However, many people do not fully understand or know how to use the privacy settings in Facebook.  This causes there personal information to be available to anyone.  Anybody that knows their name can access their page and view their information.

Also, the advertisements on Facebook take advantage of your personal information.  I do not know about you, but I have seen advertisements regarding information I have on Facebook on numerous occasions.  I have seen ads that pertain to the school I attend as well as other things.  

All in all, while the information you put on Facebook can be secure if you choose to make it that way, you are still giving all of that information to a company.  This company has immense amounts of information about people from all over the world which is pretty amazing.  Considering the fact that knowledge is power, Facebook is a pretty damn powerful organization and they show no signs in slowing down.  It is just interesting to think about the idea that Facebook may not be completely free.  Now that Facebook is starting to transition to using Timeline, you basically sell your entire life story to them in return for the use of their service.

"Going Green"

The Innovation Diaries

Going green is probably something that we've all become familiar with.  It is the process of switching to environmentally friendly products and to try to cut down on our own contributions to the national carbon footprint.  Those two simple words have a lot behind them in terms or rhetoric and civic engagement.

With regard to the rhetorical effect of color, Going green holds a lot of persuasion.  The fact that the word "green" is part of this slogan or even movement is important.  Green has a lot of positive things associated with it and therefore, it has a very positive effect on people.  Green can be used to show that things are natural, healthy, and calm.  All of these things would make a person feel good and it makes going green seem like a really good thing to do.  Also, the obvious of thing associated with the color green is money.  This helps portray the idea that going green can save you money.  While for most "green" products, you do not save immediately, in the long run you will save some money.

The phrase can also be seen as a promoter of civic engagement.  It pushes people to do their part.  A lot of this is done through the use of color as stated previously, but "going" shows that some sort of motion or action is required in order for us to be green.  We have to "go" green which means it is a process.  It is something that needs to be done as individuals in order for an effect to be truly seen.  These two words convince us to do something as individuals.  Going green implies that being environmentally friendly is not only a good thing, but also that taking the steps towards being environmentally friendly is what needs to be done to make an impact.  In this way, I think that these two words really do promote civic engagement and essentially tell the public that unless they are active citizens that voice their opinions on the matter and take part in the process themselves, nothing will really change.

I just thought it would be interesting to look at the effect that just two words can have on people.  Obviously, there are a ton of other rhetorical techniques employed through environmentally friendly advertisements and things of that nature, but the fact that "going green" can have a relatively profound effect is fascinating.

THON 2012 - Don't Waste One Minute

In light of the weekend we are heading into, I thought it would be appropriate to analyze some of the rhetorical techniques used in what I find to be a very strong promotional video for THON.  The video, entitled "THON 2012 - Don't Waste One Minute", is a video that I've seen a few times and each time, it manages to have a powerful effect on me.  For one, it shows the BJC full of students in various sections wearing very bright colors.  The overall purpose of this in THON as well as the video is to portray happiness.

The song in the background is also very powerful.  This song is "Open Your Eyes" by Snow Patrol.  The actual meaning of the song pertains to a couple in love, but something is keeping apart.  The man wants the women to open her eyes to realize their love so they don't have to waste any more time apart.  However, in relation to THON, the meaning is slightly different.  Basically, we, the Penn State community, need to open our eyes and realize that we are all needed.  There are so many families out there that truly love Penn State for THON, and we can't waste one minute forgetting that.  We all have to realize that every minute that we devote to THON truly counts which is an extremely important idea to get across.

Moreover, the text that is displayed on the screen displays an important message.  It shows us how important we can be to the families.  It shows us that we can truly make their lives just a little bit better and that we can make a difference.  The fact that the message is spanned throughout the entire promo helps maintain emotion and attention for the entire video.

Lastly, the constant joy you see on the faces of everyone, especially the kids, makes it clear that THON actually works.  It is not "just a number". It is so much more than that.  It is the gift of hope.  The gift of brightening the days of children and families who deserve a little brightness in their lives.  This joy that can be seen on their faces has such a strong emotional effect.  The video employs the use of pathos to an amazing extent and I can't wait to experience this emotion firsthand starting tomorrow.

Bud Light Platinum

Thrillist

For all of you that were able to catch the Super Bowl this year, you probably saw this commercial.  For those that did not, I'll give a brief explanation.  During one of the commercial breaks, there was a commercial for Bud Light Platinum in which "Levels" by Avicii is playing and you see people dressed up in an office building drinking Bud Light Platinum.  There is a voice talking about how "they" say that you can't mix business with pleasure.  Basically, the purpose of the ad is to prove that you can mix those two things.

Rhetorically, the ad seems to focus on ethos and pathos.  With regard to ethos, the voice of the man is very calm and confident in what he is saying.  This helps make the voice seem believable.  His voice almost reminds of the "epic" voice you hear in the beginning of movies.  With regard to pathos, I'm sure everyone has wanted to make seemingly boring jobs, projects, or something along those lines more pleasurable and exciting.  However, this goes does not really conform to what is expected of you in situations like those.  Therefore, seeing these people having a good time, drinking, and listening to a DJ play Avicii may strike our emotions.  We may feel envious of the people in the commercial and want to go out and buy Bud Light Platinum to have the chance at having the same enjoyment.

Bud Light also had another commercial for Bud Light Platinum which was, for lack of a better word, cool in my opinion.  However, in terms of reaching a wider demographic, I think the commercial that I have previously discussed is much better.  The "cool" commercial showed a very high tech looking factory producing Bud Light Platinum.  While I was intrigued by the commercial and I kind of wanted to try the new beverage after seeing it, I feel like factories and technical things appeal more to guys than they do girls.  I think many girls would see this  and have no real connection at first.

All in all, I think the Bud Light Platinum commercials were pretty entertaining and they did create an appeal to try the drink.  The commercials reminded me of a quote from Talladega Nights:  "Cause it says like, I wanna be formal, but I'm here to party too."  Though this quote is referencing Cal Naughton Jr.'s preference for Jesus to wear a tuxedo t-shirt, I think it can apply to Bud Light Platinum as well.

Groupthink

DCT Advisors LLC

Groupthink is a very interesting subject.  Basically, groupthink is the idea that when people work in a group, the desire to come to a decision outweighs the desire to voice your actual opinions.  People may not say what they truly want to say to avoid conflict within the group and to help with group cohesion.  In a way, I think groupthink can strongly prohibit civic engagement.  I'm sure we've all seen small instances of groupthink occurring.  For instance, if a professor or teacher asks if anyone else needs more time on an exam, you may need more time, but because nobody else raises their hand, you don't either.  However, there may have been others who also needed more time, but they had the same mindset as you and decided to judge whether or not they would raise their hand based on if others did so.

In a broader spectrum, an important political topic may arise in your community in which everyone seems to agree on one side of the argument.  You, however, may feel another way, but decide to keep your opinions to yourself.  Again, there may be others who are doing the same exact thing and because of that, the other side of the argument is never mentioned.  While the people who want to argue against the common view could have very strong points, these points are never brought to light.  Things like this could even happen on an even broader scale for all we know.

I just find it interesting that a perfectly viable opinion may never be heard simply because of a decision we make to avoid embarrassment.  Groupthink could potentially be a major inhibitor of civic engagement and prevent many people from being the "good" citizens that they are obligated to be.  Can you think of any instances where groupthink may have caused a group project or something of that sort to be worse off?  I'm sure we have all probably experienced this in one way or another, even if we did not realize it.

I Believe in Beanie Baby Boos

Medium Pepsi?

Wikimedia

"Medium Pepsi?"  I'm sure anyone that has had Panda Express in the HUB has been asked this question; whether you have realized it or not.  Two simple words the cashiers manage to slip in before each and every final payment.  You get your food, move down the line, and they ask..."Medium Pepsi?"  It's pretty amazing how such a subtle insertion of rhetoric can drastically affect the overall operation of a business.  They do not ask if you want a drink.  They simply ask those same words every single time.  By doing so, they essentially take away the invitation for the customer to go through the simple thought process of what size drink they want.

Granted that this is basically my opinion, I am almost positive that many people that want a drink just say yes to that question because they know that they do want a drink.  While I'm sure many of these people would be fine with a small drink, they get a medium because they are almost rushed into a decision.Conversely, Panda Express may actually lose money in the cases where the customer may have gotten a large drink, but just said yes to the medium.  Nevertheless, I think the money that they gain from the customers who may have gotten small drinks would be much larger than the money they lose from the customers who may have gotten large drinks.

Although, in the eyes of the Panda Express employees, this is just a business strategy, it is without a doubt an example of rhetoric in our daily lives.  They attempt to persuade every single customer every single day to get a medium sized drink.  And not just any drink; a Pepsi.  The reason I think that they say Pepsi rather just "Medium drink?" is because then people would be forced to decide which drink they want thereby taking away the feeling of being rushed to make a decision.  By saying a specific drink, they go one step further in already making the decision for you.  Pepsi is also the third most popular soda in the US behind Coke and Diet Coke respectively (MSNBC) , making the reason they say Pepsi quite obvious.  All in all, I just found it very interesting that rhetoric presents itself even in the places we might least expect it.  It would be fascinating to know if anyone else can think of an instance in which such subtle rhetoric can be very effective.

"Black Out Day" - Success or Failure?

IB Times

Yesterday, many popular websites participated in a blackout in order to spread awareness and gain opposition towards SOPA and PIPA.  These acts sought to censure the information and media that Americans can, at the moment, freely access on the web.  Their overall purpose is to stop piracy and copyright infringement.  I found the blackout to be a great representation of rhetoric in our society.  The most popular sites that I know of that took part in the "blackout" were Google, Wikipedia, and Reddit which are all highly trafficked sites.

If you had gone on Wikipedia yesterday, you would find a black screen with a message regarding Wikipedia's opposition to the bills as well as a box where you could enter your zip code in order to find your local representatives so you could contact them.  This was a very strong sense of rhetoric in that Wikipedia formed an extremely blatant and definitive argument against SOPA and PIPA through something as simple as shutting down for 24 hours.  I don't know about you, but Wikipedia is one of the few websites that I probably go on every day so their message got to me very quickly.

Wikipedia, along with the other participating websites, forced a majority of America to understand what SOPA and PIPA are going to inhibit if they are passed and by doing so, these websites were able to gain the support of many Americans.  Status after status on Facebook was about the blackout or a link to sign a petition against the two bills.  The blackout clearly had an impact on my Facebook friends, but did it have an impact on the Senators and Representatives that would ultimately vote on the legislation?  After all, their votes are what truly matter in the grand scheme of things.

When all was said and done, the blackout was as successful as it could have possibly been.  According to an article I read on Time's website (Time), the number of Senators in opposition of the bill increased from 5 to 35.  It's pretty remarkable how strong of an argument the "blackout" made and I personally hope that neither SOPA nor PIPA are passed.  Do you feel the same way?