Final Blog

  As a final reflection of the work I have placed into my webzine (to include the collective class webzine) I have found there to be points of contention and points of agreement.  It would seem that the knowledge base I cultivated from this experience could be classed as impressive.  From the early part of this project I struggled to find reputable sources that would develop my main ideas and goals to the intended audience.  However, that seemed to dissolve upon the guidance of research protocols and bolian operator use when searching for information via a search engine.  With the source list growing I have been able to manipulate and tweak my webzine into a single provision of information that the audience can access easily and with out a large amount of foot work of their own.  It would also seem that the original direction has been changed in some ways that have both singled out main ideas while simultaneously broadening the overall dilemma I have tried to portray to the audience. 

Webtext Revision

Introduction:  The intro to my webtext is brief, to the point, and encompasses the main idea behind my webtext.  What I would like to add in the intro would be some expert opinion, or a tangible number that will give the reader a clear understanding of the magnitude of the issue I have presented.  I think the placement of this idea should come just before the main point of the entire webtext as to help enhance the point I am trying to make.

G.M.O. and the Food Supply:  This section describes the impact of G.M.O.s on crops, but I would like to add some other direct impacts that food researchers are beginning to develop, such as GE salmon and others of the like.  I believe this will help facilitate the point that GE food is on a fast incline in many different aspect of the food supply.  Additionally, I would like to differentiate, but also show the connection between GMO's and GE foods.

How Safe are G.E. Foods:  This section should be the crux of my entire webtext.  In this section I would like to add some suspected side effects that are beginning to show themselves in the health of consumer of GE foods.  I would also like to add any evidence, or promising leads into known future issues foreseen by researchers today.  Lastly, I want to enhance the idea of how little research is conducted and who actually conducts the research.

How is Our Consumers and Food Supply Affected by G.M.O. Use:  In this section I want to enhance the far reaching affects by discussing the impacts on research methods, acceptance, and what that could mean for the health community.  I also want to add a discussion of the impact to farmers and what that means for the consumers.  This is an important idea to share through this section given that it has a direct impact on the fight against GMO foods.

Conclusion:  I believe the conclusion should be revised to give a more direct call to action.  The reflection can be tweaked a bit, but I do find it does a decent job of that already.

Images Used:  The images I have selected do enhance the main points I am trying to make and offer a valid connection to the ideas of the respective section.  However, I would like to add another photo or two with the new discussion I will be adding to my webtext.  I believe that more visual enhancements will help drive home the main ideas that I find to be most important.

Anchor Text:  The anchor texts of my webtext are lacking in number and effectiveness on the reader.  I will be adding more anchor texts in the current sections and will tie in additional anchor texts with the new information.

Analysis of Phase Two Podcast

   From the start I knew that writing for an audience that would be read aloud was going to provide it's own unique challenges.  My initial impression of the phase two podcast wasn't something of a negative feeling.  I actually enjoyed the development of my soon to be recorded podcast.  However, the information I had to organize for the podcast proved to be the most difficult part to me.  This was because I had to realize the time contraints in conjunction with accurate direct information on my topic of GMO labeling to fit with in.
   In comparison to the written Webtext (which provided a whole separate type of conflict to me), the podcast actually came to me a bit easier.  I attribute this ease to come from the obligation to narrow down the information only providing relevant and easily understood information.  In this restraint of information share, I found that the choices I made (from the appeals used down to the structure of ideas) differed greatly between the two.  In the Webtext there was an ability, more a requirement, to fully develop the ideas that were being presented about my topic.  With no real limitations to word count the development of ideas came rather easily.  In contrast, the podcast script was geared toward fully understood topics with little bits of research to back them up.
   In that fundamental difference between the Webtext and podcast script, I selected information for the podcast that could be absorbed easily by the listener.  With that decision came the type of appeal I plan to use to help facilitate that information transition.  The choice I made was a combination of logos and pathos.  The logos aspect of my podcast was in the statistics, and "short jabs" used at the expense of the corporations I was talking against. Pathos was then used to pull the listener in to the fight and make them feel as if they had the control to stop the string of corporate uncertainties.
   Also noted through out the text is the verbal citing used to help give creditability to my claims.  Unlike in the written Webtext, the podcast script had to rely on such citing given the obvious consideration of there being a listener rather a reader.  So with the aspect of hearing over reading, giving verbal credit to the experts and sources used was important so that the reader can grasp those expert opinions used. Additionally, this difference has also played a significant role in the ethos developed through out my podcast script.  
   Overall, though there was many differences between context, rhetorical appeals, and structure, the Webtext and podcast script came down to the same basic research and marketing decisions.  The research that backs the Webtext is the same research methods used to develop the podcast script.  Same also applies to the marketing questions used when developing the argument in both.  Given that the arguments were very similar is goes without question how the focus in both stayed similar.  This similarity created an overall cause to drive both projects in a direction of action upon the readers or listeners.

Boolean Operators and results

Google Search

• GMO AND food labeling AND U.S- results were poor as they did not offer anything new, or credible for that matter, that I could learn from or apply to my project.
• GMO (food labeling or restrictions):  This search actually resulted in an article presented to the public by a company called monsanto.  If you do not know who they are; Monsanto is one of the largest producers, and largest advocate against the labeling of, GMO foods.  This company has their hands in a great many organizations, including the FDA, USDA, ADA, and government strong holds that facilitate nutritional research in the U.S, all for the purpose of control over the food market.  Additionally, this company is the leader in the "Say no to 37" campaign which is a proposition on the California ballot this coming month that, if passed, will require all companies to label GMO foods in California. 
• GMO food and (FDA regulation):  The results of this search came up with a few good sources of information to look at.  

It seems that many of the searches on good all came up with very similar, if not the same, results.  I had a hard time finding any variance of results.

Google Advanced Search

• GMO AND food labeling AND U.S. : The results from this were very poor.  It told me that I had to many words in a search and gave me very few results that were nothing close to creditable.
• GMO (food labeling or restrictions): The results from this search gave me a lot of results, but most of them were not credible sources, or gave opinionated points of view with little to no research to back any of the claims.  
• GMO foods and (FDA regulation):  Ironically I found many results that had a bias towards not labeling GMO foods.  However,  I found very little information pertaining to the actual restrictions, or lack there of, that is currently in practice.  

Overall I did not really care for this method of google search.  The results where very poor and flooded with opinion, but very little research or credible analysis to back them.  Truthfully I did not find a single article that I would prefer to use that taught me something new.  Not unless I want to follow opinions with other searches to verify any truth to the statements.  

Annotated Bibliography

Laskawy, T.  (2012, April 4).  FDA to GMO labeling campaign: What million signatures?.  Retrieved 

     

     from http://grist.org/food/fda-to-gmo-labeling-campaign-what-millon-signatures/

 

   The idea behind this article is about a particular recent decision of the FDA to denounce the volume of support given to the "Just Label It" petition (JLI) that was recently summited to the FDA regarding the labeling of GMO foods.  The docket was presented with 1 million supporting signatures, or as the FDA calls it "comments", but when address by the FDA the comments were only 394 in number.  The significance behind this is that the FDA claims that any petition presented is viewed at 1 comment regardless of how many signatures make it onto that one petition.  However, in the past the FDA has utilized a petition X with X number of comments, or signatures type of system.  It begs the question then why now do they only claim one petition with one signature regardless of how many actual signatures that petition received?

Authority:  The actual credibility of this article comes primarily from the large amounts of hyper links used to facilitate the point the author is making.  He provides to his story with actual evidence in the several hyper links used.  However, his needless comments on the topic does not help bring any authority to his article, but more brings a childish sarcastic aspect that only will push the reader away from believing what he has to say.

Accuracy:  The accuracy of information is spot on.  I remember reading about this particular issue a while back.  More over, the hyper links certainly help give you more information that helps reduce errors in the transfer of information.  

Currency:  I believe this issue is as current as it gets almost.  This just happened earlier this year and provides a real current insight to the fight of consumers and the government on food standards and safety.

Objectivity:  This aspect is where the article is lacking.  It is clear that the author has support for the petition advocating for GMO labeling.  His comments riddled through out the article also help demonstrate his distain for the issue he is writing about.  Though i can be understood that the author is very upset at such an overt display of unprofessionalism by the FDA, but this still creates a bias that is just as overt and unprofessional.  

Monsanto.  (2012).  Food safety.  Retrieved from

      http://www.monsanto.com/newsviews/Pages/food-safety.aspx#q1

   This article by Monsanto (is pains me to even use them as a reference) pertains to the view of safety as given by Monsanto, a leading super giant in the biotechnology industry.  It provides commonly asked questions regarding GMO food safety and the testing that backs their claim.  It displays this information in a question/answer format.

Authority:  Despite the negative light this company is placed under, their authority on this matter is very relavent as they have been a crucial part in the development and use of GE foods.  However, it should not go without saying that this company is also one of the biggest antagonists of GE food labeling both publicly and monetarily.

Accuracy:  This aspect is where I find the article looses is foot hold.  Yes, technically speaking the information given is very accurate.  Though, the information given is extremely vague in that there is a large grey area left uncovered by the answers given to the questions.  There is no single study used to help facilitate the readers understanding that this company believes what it is saying, or that it is true.  Additionally, accuracy in this context should be met with legitimate science and not opinion, or hear say by the company that provides the information.  Monsanto address no real matter of research other than simply giving you the FDA website and saying this is what we do.  In that I find the accuracy of this website lacking, but if only given a short skim with a rhetorical eye.

Objectivity:  As I have all ready mentioned, this article provides the very definition of bias (much like the previous article).  Monsanto is openly critical of current food policy that have any impact on GE foods and the safety that consumers demand from them.  Monsanto is the largest contributor to the production of and research on GE foods.  Do you really think they are going to say that they are unsafe and need to be labeled?  

Project Censored.  (2011, September 30).  US agencies trying to outlaw GMO food labeling.  

     Retrieved from http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/20-us-agencies-trying-to-outlaw- 

     gmo-food-labelling/

   This article briefly discussed how the FDA is making attempts to regulate the world food supply and its opinion of GMO food labeling.  In short, this article touches on the FDA's actions and opinions that say there should be no need for GMO food labeling in any country and further more that there should be a ban placed on labeling GMO foods period.  

Authority:  The website that this came from is not one that I have heard of, but the sources given at the end of this article are very reliable.  However,  this website is attached to a magazine that, with a little research  has been in circulation for a little a while that helps provide information about government censorship.

Accuracy:  The accuracy of this article is legitimate  The issue used is one that the FDA has openly admitted on several occasions.  The sources given at the end also add to the accuracy of this article.

Currency: This article was originally written in 2011, but was featured in the 2012 issue of a magazine associated with this website.  So the issue is relatively current and still pertains to the struggling issue of GMO foods.

Objectivity:  The focus of this website is one that fights against government censorship.  Against with tis article I found a level of bias that was geared towards making the government, in this case the FDA, look bad.  Though I did find that this article voice was written with no sarcasm and seemed to only provide the small facts of the issue.  With the sources given at the end, the reader can also follow through and develop their own opinion with the information.  

Podcast Intro/Webtext revision response

A:

• Identify and explain the problem you are going to solve, and who cares about this problem:  The topic I will use as the focus of my podcast is labeling GMO food products. In my Webtext I have touched base with what a GMO is, the amount of GMO foods, the safety and research that is behind them, how prominent these foods have become in our food supply.  I plan to use the Podcast as a way to focus on the action of labeling genetically engineered foods.  I want to briefly discuss the argument in question (on both sides) and provide a way of action the listener can take.  The audience for this podcast will stay the same, but as this will be a  call to action this may only reach those of age to actually stand against GMO's. So specifically I want to focus on consumers of decision making age that have the ability to take action for the labeling of GMO foods.  
• Describe the effects of the problem, and specify how the effects affect your audience:  The effects of this issue is unknowingly consuming controversial GE foods.  As my Webtext has also described, I believe in the right of the consumer to make a choice, but a choice has to be given in order for that to happen.  Labeling GE foods is paramount in giving the choice back to the consumer about what types of foods they want to eat. Easily connected then is this topic to my audience as they are the consumers unknowingly consuming controversial GMO's.  
• Discuss the causes of the problem:  Some of the primary causes of the GMO labeling argument is corporate greed, consumer's lack of education of the topic, inaction towards it as a result of that education gap, and perhaps most troublesome; the bias community of leaders representing the FDA and USDA that all have previous ties or bias to the GE corporations that approve these foods for safe commercial use.  
• Offer practical solutions to the problem:  A very simple and practical solution that any one can accomplish is making a voice.  By simply writing state congressmen, educating yourself and others on GMO foods and avoiding them, or even complaining straight to the corporations themselves are all valid options for getting GMO's on the food label.  The companies are living in  a world without laws governing their actions.  It is the consumers job to bring back order to these lawless corporations of greed.  
• Include a working main point sentence:  Having a mandatory regulation of labeling GE foods is absolutely crucial to the consumer world as it provides a balance of consumer choice and corporate responsibility, based on consumer choice, to provide safe and healthy foods to the nation.  
• Include two new sources that you haven't previously used:

-  Bitman, M.  (2011, February 15).  Why aren't G.M.O. foods labeled.  The New York Times.      

        Retrieved from  http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/15/why-arent-g-m-o-foods-labeled/

-  Maisto, M.  (2011, December 1).  With GMO labeling still missing, look for the opposition.  Forbes.  

        Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/sites/michellemaisto/2011/12/01/with-gmo-labels-still-missing-look-for-the-opposite/

• Since this podcast will eventually become part of your multimodal project, you should be specific regarding why the topic of your podcast is well-suited to an “oral” presentation and how it will complement your Webtext:  This particular topic s well suited for an oral presentation via podcast because there can be a level of passion and voice put into it that will help  grab the audience.  As I am obviously pro food labeling I can demonstrate the purpose of this action and portray a level of urgency.  I believe hearing a real voice on this subject will give the audience a real feeling of action rather than just reading words on the topic asking them to do something. As I have mentioned earlier in this response this topic of labeling GMO's is very well suited to the argument I have raised pertaining to the consumer right to choice.  

B:  

   Upon my consult with instructors I have gained a few bits of research and source knowledge that has already proved to be useful.  I did not consider using news articles of reputable newspapers such as The New York Times, or Forbes magazine.  This has opened up a whole new world of information and opinion that I can use to help facilitate my main ideas through out my Webtext.  Additionally, I was also shown how to place caption under my photos which I will now use as a way to relate my photos to the text.  Lastly, source citation and references were also discussed as I had not placed the into my Webtext at that point.  the use of this information will allow me to tweet my Webtext, and add additional information, so that the reader and smoothly traverse through my site and acquire useful and well placed information.  

   From my peer review, which was very helpful, I will work to refine my introduction so that is grabs the reader a little better.  I also need to add some subtitles so that the ideas have a clear start and finish point allowing for better transition of thought as the reader flows through my site.  Also, I will work to add in a bit of opposition through out my text.  I do not want to lose my credibility because I left out the opinion of those who appose my topic.  

Rhetorical Analysis

Part A:
  Currently I do not have any real issues aside from the previously mentioned issue with research.  One question that I have is the difficulty I am having bringing the idea of research and its apparent lack of availability to me as a consumer into my argument.  I am not sure how to demonstrate that and still allow some sort of credibility from is as I have only been researching this topic for a short amount of time. 

Part B:   

1.  http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2012/09/music_festivals_summer_2012.html

2.  In this photo the first thing I noticed was the energy portrayed through the colored lights in the back ground.  Bright greens, yellows, reds, and oranges were used which are all enhanced by the brightness of the bulbs used.  These colors represent high levels of energy (especially the yellows, reds, and oranges.)  Additionally the colors of the lights are enhanced even further as the dominant back drop color is black, or dark grey.  All of the band members, except the back up singer on the far right, is wearing black, the equipment is black and dark grey, and the stage surrounding are black. This help make those bright energy colors stand out.  Lastly, the words written on the top of the stage are white which really stand out among the black scheme and the colored lights.  The words are in such contrast that they make a lasting impression on the viewer of the picture.

3.  The photo is of a band playing on a stage.  From the music equipement and the apparent energy of the band member who has jumped in the air as the photo was snapped, I can draw that this must be a rock band, or some type of high energy music show.  In the back ground is a drummer with a drum set, a bass guitar player, and a back up singer singing into her microphone.  All of these individual images inside the image help me conclude I am looking at a band playing rock music on stage.  That being said, the context of this photo is just that; a band playing at a french music festival.  The caption at the bottom of the page gives you a specific time and event, but the photo itself is simply understood to show the same idea, however a bit more general as is doesn't give a location or type of event.  I do not believe this photo is made to stand for a point other than demonstrating the high energy performances that can be viewed at this festival.  However, I could maybe conclude that this photo was taken during a festival that was for a particular cause.  usually music of this nature can sometimes be associated with anti-government movements and rebelliousness.


Part C:

Podcast Summary: 
  The first half of the podcast was about the three persuasive appelas; ethos, logos, pathos, and their important role in public communication.  A brief history was also given explaining the connection between modern day communications skills and one large contributor to the development of that skill, Aristotle.  A point was made that his works are a difficult read resulting in a loss of good information on rhetoric, but the three previously mentioned appeals still remains one of his most well known contributions to modern day rhetoric.  
  The second portion of this podcast was about the studies of mind jet and the use of visual images rather than plain bullet point power points.  This research is founded on the lateral thinking the brain does and it expresses the use of visual images aid in the connection a presentation can make with the audience.  A few statistics were given to help support this point such as topics individuals were thinking aside from the actual presentation they were at.    Overall the main idea was increasing visual stimuli when presenting to an audience of people.
  The last portion of the podcast was a T & A section.  A question was asked pertaining to ability to deliver effectively without mistakes even when the presentation was well prepared and thought out.  The speakers response was that practice was paramount to a successful speech.  gaining objectivity about the energy, delivery, and overall feel of your presentation is important to learning how well prepared you are.   To do this the speaker suggested practicing in front of trusted friends, colleagues, a video camera, or even a pet.

Rhetorical Analysis (B): 
   The context of this prompt is to demonstrate awareness regarding drunk driving and its effects.  The photos shown are of Jacqueline Saburido, a victim of a drunk driving accident.  Most times when drunk driving is discussed it pertains to innocent victims being killed, but in the girls case her point to make is that sometimes the end result is in a life time of torment and disfigurement.  Jacqueline has derived these opinions and warning from her own personal experience in a 1999 car accident in which she was trapped in the burning car resulting in severe burns to a  majority of her body.  The audience of this prompt is geared towards individuals who drink and drive.  However, I feel like the impression this girl has to offer can be far reaching and can impact any driver on the road as we all can stand to take away a message from this situation. Personally I feel as if this graphic depiction of the before and after of the accident is a very clear cut way to get the main point across.  It is shocking and grotesque, but very much important and relevant to the safety of the road.  It has a simplistic layout, but portrays a very powerful message through slight text and dominant imagery of what this girl has gone through since the accident.
  

 

Google Scholar Annotated Bib.

Harlander, S. (2002). The Evolution of Modern Agriculture and Its Future with

     Biotechnology. Journal of American College of Nutrition, 21. Retrieved from

     http://www.jacn.org/content/21/suppl_3/161S.full?sid=4e37172c-2f76-45b9-8e1a-1c4ce7b69330

Summary: This article demonstrates a few different view points; from the view of American consumers in contrast to European consumers (or what the author believes the opinion to be) and from the agricultural stand point of creating functional foods. This article displays graphs explaining the growth of biotechnology in the commercial food market and skims over the legality behind the regulations of GE foods. According to this article there is no law binding any food to be labeled in the U.S. which is quite contrast to our European counterparts who require such labels on all food. The author also touches on specific modifications to food such as irradiation treatment which creates mutations inside the DNA allowing for a certain levels of improved seed variety. However, Harlander discusses that there are no food or environmental safety checks in place for these foods as of yet. Additionally, Harlander continues on the say that the acceptance of GMO production and the benefits to them are widely accepted among the scientific community with no apparent health complications tied to the GE foods in question.


Assess: Upon further research of this author; Susan Harlander turned out to be an experience scientist who specialized in biotechnology in food. She currently works for a company called BIOrational Consultants, but has worked for other companies such as General Mills and Pillsbury. From this I was a bit concerned that she would be very bias to her scientific community, but through out this article she remained very black and white in her discussion. Harlander has written an article that remains without opinion giving basic facts in the debate of GE foods. I found this article to be particularly informative in that she gives multiple view points to help educate rather than sway her audience. I still take this information with a grain of salt, but more because the article is a bit older, rather the authors input.


Reflect: I believe I may not use this article because of that time gap, but it has certainly lead me into a direction to review current laws and policies of safety and environmental checks in the GE industry. This article will be a good reference to reflect on how things have changed in the last decade.






Istvan, S., Emese, K., Beata, K., Andrea, L. (2008). Functional food. Product development,

     marketing and consumer acceptance—A review. Appetite, 51 (3), 456-467.


Summary: This article is a review of the market with respect to functional foods, or foods enhanced with some kind of technology for a certain health benefit. The most common example of a functional food is fortified beverages with vitamins and minerals added. This particular market has been a growing part of the conventional food market and has reached several of the foods groups consumed on a daily basis. The authors review that the market is in favor of such foods as it helps with sustainability purposes and overall good health promotion. However, they also conclude that the production of these functional foods are risky in that a large amount of research must go into their production to fully understand the physiological effects the foods will have on the consumers. lastly, this article explains the pattern of consumer acceptance based on the way in which the particular enhancements are marketed. The example used was the increased awareness of vitamins, minerals, fiber and how their wide acceptance as fortification in food is connected to the market amplifying their need in a diet to promote healthy living.


Assess: Off the top I believe this article has kept the opinions of the authors from permeating the results of their review. It seems as if the article has taken many different perspectives and placed them in a logical order allowing for the reader to follow and understand the progression of events that is now the functional food market. I also like that there is a healthy amount of good and bad placed on the purpose and development of functional foods. This give the reader a sense that the authors are not out for one sire or another, but more to educate and let the reader make their own choice. The currency of this article is a bit older than I would prefer, but 2008 is a good representation of the growth being observed in our conventional food market.


Reflect: I understand that this article in not primarily about GE food labeling, but I do believe that functional foods are a very close and encompassing topic that should be understood along side GE foods. The market of functional foods sways the public opinion a great deal as it gives way to the acceptance of other technology put into our food supply. This article is a good lead into my topic and I would like to apply some of this information to my web text