Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Eng 101 Project 2 - Fall 2019
Eng 101 Project 2 - Fall 2019
Eng 101 Project 2 - Fall 2019
Project 2 takes the theme of analytically exploring and “seeing” beneath the surface of text that
we began in Project 1 into the digital realm. We also continue developing your critical thinking
skills. Finally, this project provides an opportunity to build your vocabulary of rhetorical
terminology and enhance your Habits of Mind related to multimodal composing, as well as
further your progress toward mastering the WPA Outcomes.
Your task is to compose a rhetorical analysis of part of the social media account of a relevant,
well-known public figure (see “Project Overview” below for selection parameters). Your
analysis must be substantially informed by at least two credible secondary sources. Ideally,
at least one of these sources will be a scholarly source found through the ASU Library. And,
since this is a multimodal project designed to be viewed and read online, your analysis must
include at least three multimedia files (such as visuals or audio files), which should be taken
directly from your chosen social media account. Since your rhetorical analysis should be
composed to be read and experienced online, other multimodal elements, such as hyperlinks or
embedded media, are strongly encouraged. (Note that these multimodal elements do not count
toward your secondary source total.)
This rhetorical analysis should be 1000 words at minimum (double-spaced with a 12-pt font)
and should not exceed 2000 words. All secondary sources and visuals should be cited with
APA in-text citations and an APA-style references page (which does not count toward the
minimum word count).
Your analysis should also have a creative, relevant title and be directed toward an audience of
external readers who might find your analysis in an online digital ‘zine that accepts rhetorical
investigations of popular culture (such as Harlot). How can you make such online readers care
about the topic, the focus, of your analysis? What level of formality is expected for an audience
of this type? How can you incorporate your sources/visuals in a reader-centered way?
Project Overview
Let’s break this project down piece by piece, starting with the most important decision you’ll
make: selecting a subject for analysis. As mentioned above, the subject of your analysis should
be a relevant and well-known public figure. Let’s define each of these terms for the purposes
of this project. The social media account you select should be for a prominent public
individual (not a company, organization, or brand) and should be relevant either to your local
community (where you currently live) or to your academic or professional goals. Use the
following parameters for selecting a suitable subject.
For the local community angle, you should select a social media account that is
somehow important or influential in the community where you currently live. For
example, if you currently live in Phoenix, you might select the Twitter feed of a prominent
local entertainment personality or the Instagram account of a popular food truck owner.
Or, if you live in rural Montana, you might select the YouTube channel of a local
wilderness expert or the Facebook page of your state governor or senator.
Your other option is to select a social media account of someone who works in your
current field of study or who works in your desired professional field. For example, if you
are a Political Science major, you could select the Twitter feed or YouTube channel of a
political journalist. Or, if you want to work in fashion, you might select the Facebook
page of a fashion blogger or the Instagram account of a popular fashion designer.
The parameters for “well-known” are less specific, but, ideally, the social media account
you choose will have a large number of followers, be verified, or otherwise be somehow
prominent in your local community or academic/professional field. (Work closely with
your Instructor to determine if your chosen account is sufficiently “well known.”)
As stated above, you may not select a company, organization, brand, etc. For example,
you could select the personal Twitter account of Apple CEO Tim Cook, but not any kind
of general social media account for the Apple brand.
Finally, you should limit your choices to one of the four social media sites/apps
mentioned above: Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, and YouTube. You may explore
alternatives during the prewriting activities, but you will need Group Instructor
approval to choose a subject’s social media account outside of these four. Also,
note that due to its temporary nature, Snapchat is not an acceptable social media
platform for this project.
Once you’ve selected a suitable individual subject’s social media account to analyze, you
should begin to focus on the specifics of rhetorical analysis. This is a different genre than the
profile you composed in Project 1. Rhetorical analysis is concerned with exploring and
explaining the specific persuasive choices the author of a text has made. The rhetorical
concepts we are specifically practicing (ethos, pathos, logos, and kairos) are key tools you
must use in your analysis.
You will be looking closely at the rhetorical choices the creator of your chosen social media
account has made (e.g., words, visuals and other multimodal elements, timeliness) in their
posts, looking specifically for rhetorical choices you find interesting - and that you think external
readers will find interesting as well. For example, does the social media account’s
reasonableness (logos) contradict itself in different parts of the account? Is the emotional
message (pathos) inconsistent? Does the account have content that damages the owner’s
credibility (ethos)? Are the topics the owner of the account is posting on out-of-date or timely
(kairos)? Do parts of the account rhetorically “miss the mark” in terms of the audience being
targeted? How? Why? It is up to you to study your chosen social media account and find
content on the account that you find both meaningful and rhetorically interesting, and focus your
analysis around this content. Overall, what does your analysis of the social media account
reveal that will be of rhetorical interest to external readers?
To answer this question, you’ll need to craft a thesis statement to help you organize and plan
your analytical research and composing. Ask yourself, “What are the main ideas I am trying to
communicate to my readers?” Your thesis should communicate this main idea and preview your
analysis in one or two succinct, reader-centered sentences. That’s the hard part, of course!
Once you’ve articulated your thesis, you’ll be ready to collect and organize your analytical
support for that thesis, including your multimodal inclusions, design, and secondary
sources. This research allows you to practice multimodal composing as well as one of the most
important ways to raise your own ethos when composing: incorporating the ideas of other
credible writers or composers into your own to create new knowledge. The ideas of others can
provide lenses through which we can look to “see,” to understand, our analytical subject in new
ways.
While you are not required to use them in Project 2, the following secondary sources provide
helpful concepts and theoretical frameworks that you might find useful in your rhetorical
analysis. They are examples of credible sources that one might use to help “see” social media
in analytical and rhetorical ways. All are located within our course canvas shell in the Project 2
area.
“Lifestreaming: We Live in Public” (Alice E. Marwick)
“Writing in the Moment: Social Media, Digital Identity, and Networked Publics” (Jacob
Babb)
“Speaking Back to Our Spaces: The Rhetoric of Social Soundscaping” (Fargo Ahern
and Jordan Frith)
“Blogging Borders: Transnational Feminist Rhetorics and Global Voices” (Jessica
Ouellette)
“Like Me, Like Me Not” (Paul Muhlhauser and Andrea Campbell)
Project Requirements
Below is a brief summary of the Project 2 requirements; see the full Grading Rubric that follows
for a more detailed breakdown. These requirements apply to both your rough and final drafts.
Voice, tone, and level of formality are audience
appropriate
All composition choices are reader-centered,
rather than composer-centered
10
Introduction Grabs readers’ attention effectively and compels
them to read further
Identifies the subject of the analysis and provides
relevant context
Contains a clear thesis that prepares readers for
the content of the analysis
10
Development of Relevant and well-known public individual
60
Rhetorical Analysis selected
Effectively describes the relevant contents of the
social media account, allowing readers to “see”
the subject of analysis
Fully contextualizes the social media account
(including medium, target audience, purpose,
and message) in sophisticated ways to aid the
analysis of the account’s selected content
Fully uses the rhetorical concepts (logos, ethos,
pathos, and kairos) in the analysis of the
account’s “interesting” rhetorical content
Synthesizes the usage of the rhetorical concepts
in sophisticated ways to aid the analysis of the
social media account’s selected content
Analysis consistently works to help “prove” the
thesis made in the introduction
40
Multimodal and Textual are utilized
Secondary Sources Textual secondary sources are incorporated
effectively and contribute meaningfully in any of
the following ways:
o provides relevant context on the subject of
the social media account
o provides relevant context on the target
audience of the social media account
o provides a relevant critical lens or analytical
framework to aid the analysis of the account
Textual secondary sources are not from the
account itself but are relevant to the analysis
At least three multimodal sources from the
chosen social media account are included
Multimodal sources enhance the analysis in
meaningful ways
Multimodal sources are effectively placed and
synthesized within the surrounding analysis
Secondary sources and multimodal sources
supplement and complement, not dominate, the
overall analysis
rhetorical analysis
Provides closure to the analysis
Leaves a strong final impression on readers 10
Citation and Sources summarized, paraphrased, or quoted
10
Documentation effectively
In-text citations follow APA guidelines
References page adheres to APA guidelines
Clear transitions used between sentences and
paragraphs
All written and visual components are
aesthetically organized within the analysis
(including font, spacing, margins, indentation,
10
etc.)
Evidence of sufficient time spent revising and
editing/proofreading (i.e., free of surface errors)
Total 150
Making It All Manageable:
If no prominent individuals come to mind, you’ll need to do a bit of research to identify potential
individuals in your local community or academic/professional fields. A simple Google search can
be a good starting point, as can browsing the various social media websites/apps. If you’re still
having trouble at that point, there are several resources available: the “Talk with Your Peers”
discussion board forum, your Writing Mentor, and your Instructor.
You will also receive Instructor feedback at this stage, and you will receive Writing Mentor
feedback if you choose to attend a Revision Workshop. Learning to take in all this feedback,
synthesize it, and even reject some of it, is another crucial skill to help improve your composing
process.
In this second round of drafting, you will also want to more carefully consider the audience of
your analysis; where your rough draft was likely composer-centered, your final draft should be
reader-centered.
Timeline
Please see the Course Calendar and weekly content areas on our Canvas site.
References
Cohen, D. (2017, March 22). How Much Time Will the Average Person Spend on Social Media
http://www.adweek.com/digital/mediakix-time-spent-social-media-infographic/