Cry Me a River....or a Stream (Short Assignment # 5)

Before I even began reading the articles regarding Marshall McLuhan and Michelle Citron, the first difference I noticed was length then depth. Marshall McLuhan’s article was noticeably longer, not just longer than Michelle Citron’s but I am almost positive longer than any Wikipedia article I have ever read.  The author of his article goes into great depth with a very comprehensive and interested tone.  A reader unfamiliar with McLuhan would definitely get a great gist about who he was, so I think the author of this article definitely accomplished in writing a good Wikipedia article.

Michelle Citron’s article is incredibly short and doesn’t go into great depth at all about her accomplishments; her article is only accredited 7 citations, while McLuhan’s has 83.  At first glance, I thought the author of this article may have not have fully done his/her research or not have that much interest in the topic, but then after further reading, I realized that Michelle Citron is still alive, so she is still creating works, while Marshall McLuhan has been deceased, so his life works are being celebrated.

Before I chose a featured article, I wanted to know why an article would be chosen to be featured by Wikipedia.  It said they are “determined to be the best articles…[and] are used as examples” according to Wikipedia editors and they encompass “accuracy, neutrality, completeness, and style.”  The featured article I chose to analyze was “Cry Me a River (Justin Timberlake song).  At first glance I was astonished; the length and majority of content looked as if it would be an article about Justin Timberlake himself, not just one of his songs!  Its accuracy is amazing; it gives facts and information I never knew, such as that the song was written about his past relationship with Britney Spears, and Taylor Swift is one of the artists who covered his song.  I know this information is accurate, because it is cited.  The article definitely exercises neutrality and simply just states the facts about the song; it never compares it to another song to explain why “Cry Me a River” is better or worse.  The articles completeness is amazing; it goes into detail about “composition and lyrical interpretation,” “reception and accolades,” “commercial performance,” “music video,” “live performance and cover versions” (these serve as some of the sub-headers).   

Careful Arguments

After reading "Becoming a Citizen Critic: Where Rhetoric Meets the Road" and "Avoiding Oversimplification and Recognizing Complexity," I really like and also found it very interesting that both articles provide multiple key terms and concepts that act as their own individual sub-headers.  “Becoming a Citizen Critic” by Corbett and Eberly reminded me of Grant-Davie’s “Rhetorical Constraints,” because it discusses multiple rhetorical practices that can either help or hinder the rhetor, A.K.A a constraint, and discuss how these concepts will affect the audience.

The connection I made between both these articles is that we do need to be careful in the criticisms and/or arguments we make because a lot of readers will read along the lines of “what you see is what you get.”  Readers may interpret your argument differently than you intended simply because of the way it is constructed or delivered.

So after reading these articles and learning the different concepts on how a citizen critic will present his or her argument, Corbett and Eberly ask us “how can you assume to know what is inside the head or heart of another person…?” (124). I think this serves as a reminder of the overall concept of the connection between the articles.

 Sources:

Corbett, Edward P.M., and Rosa A. Eberly. “Becoming a Citizen Critic: Where Rhetoric Meets the Road.” In The Elements of Reasoning, 2^nd Edition, Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 2000. 121-136.

Lazare, Donald. “Avoiding Oversimplification and Recognizing Complexity” In Reading and Writing for Civic Literacy: The Critical Citizen’s Guide to Argumentative Rhetoric. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Publishers, 2005. 244-256