Tuesday, April 23, 2013

[Group Work] Reflection

          I felt that my group worked well together. We all shared ideas and listened to each other. We were able to extrapolate and get link ideas together and form new ones. To me it was not hard to work with other people's ideas. It made me open my eyes and see that the way I see things is not the only possibility. When I think about how others may interpret things it expands my ideas and reminds me to not be rude in my writing. But instead I should be respectful to any interpretation. 

         I liked the conclusion one-pager. It wrapped up the ideas that were left behind by Stein. Once you have read the article the reader does feel like Mac was the way to go because it broke the monotony of IBM's Big Brother status. But the constitutive rhetoric that was used brainwashed people into believeing IBM was bad and that Mac was good. I do not know what Stein's view on the commercial or situation is. This group worked with my groups ideas, analysis, because in order to pick the conclusion apart you had to understand how Stein picked apart the article.

       The introduction one-pager was different because it lays down the path for the analysis of the ad that Stein will be doing.I do not see a question to answer on their one-pager. The intro laid the groundwork for the analysis section. She says that she is writing this article because the ad has not been subjected to extensive critical examination. All of the one-pagers make me think about the importance of the sections Stein breaks her article into.

CP I feel that Stein was detailed in her description of the ad because readers had no other source to view that ad.

No comments:

Post a Comment