As a class, we did a lot of writing this semester and, as a result, a lot of reading. I think that what I liked about working with groups is that we could get accustomed to people’s writing styles and recognize the distinct quality of certain writers. For example, I noticed that Amanda was always able to find connections between the text the class was reading and the real world. This is something that also shows in her posts to social media sites like facebook and twitter.
Jake is an extremely eloquent writer. I think one of the lines that best shows this is in his response to Ronson, titled “Plaintiff and Defendant.” It is near the end “If there is no plaintiff and defense, then there is only an executioner.” Throughout his response he emphasizes one of the ideas that Ronson presents, that the internet is allowing for condemnation without defense. He draws upon the backlash against United Airlines. I think the reason that this line stands out is because it sounds almost poetic but is still very powerful and really emphasizes his point.
I also liked a line from Molly’s post “Writing as a Social Action.” Its not a very poetic line, but to me it stood out because I relate to it. I think about it a lot when I’m on the computer. “I hope it’s a joke, but even if it is it is not funny, at all.” In this instance she is referring to an article published on Total Frat Move (this is a thing?) called “50 Ways To Be The Perfect College Girlfriend.” The thing about the internet is that I always (and I’m sure everyone else does) has to consider this many times. Is someone being serious or are they just trying to make a joke? Is there a context or an inside thing that we (an unintended audience) are missing out on? And I think that Molly’s one uncertain statement summed up a lot of Ronson’s book (in a different way than Jake), a lot of my experience on the internet, and why the internet is such a controversial place.