Meta-Post

Looking back over my blog posts, I noticed that as the year progressed, I did a better job incorporating outside sources to show more empathy for the reader. This is clear in my first post when I start the post saying that "I have heard people complaining," but then never actually say where I heard these "people" complaining. I didn't find an outside source that grounded my argument in current events and real peoples complaints. This made it hard for readers to connect to the issue. In another one of my earlier posts, I put up a youtube video to show the readers the Verizon ad I was discussing, but nowhere in the post did I specifically talk about any contents of the ad. The closest I came to quoting the ad was when I said that that "the most heavily discussed was the Verizon ad." This put a burden on the readers of the post to actually watch the video and then connect what they just saw to what I was arguing. 

As I continued to blog, I did a better job of incorporating outside sources and giving the reader an easier time. In this post, I summarize the article that I am referencing by saying "as it states in this article," but also give a link to the article so that the reader can not only see what I got out of the article but also form their own opinions should he choose. The article was also a summary of the part of the Geneva Convention which I was referencing. This makes my argument stronger because the summary means that the reader doesn't have to interpret any language and give them a better chance at coming to the same conclusion that I did. 

Along with not doing enough incorporating of outside sources, I over-incorporated an outside source which was just as hard on the reader, and me!, when reading that post. In that over-incorporated post, I spent the majority of the time summarizing the article where I got my historical context instead of just taking what I needed from it. This summary included a lot of details that are unimportant to my argument like saying that Lincoln park had "German farmers and shop keepers in the North." This is just a detail that blurs the argument I was trying to make. Even I found it hard to follow my train of thought in that post.

Toward the end of the semester, I really think I hit my stride using outside sources in my posts. In my post about the LYTRO camera, I did a good job referencing a variety of sources and including enough to make my point but not enough to bog down my post. I first cited the LYTRO website which had a review of the camera and how great it was, but I wanted to argue how it wasn't as good as the press it was receiving said so I found a blog post by professional photographer Chase Jarvis and quoted his blog and the problems with the camera. I quoted Chase writing that this technology could create great pictures "unless... your pictures have no focus." I then gave a two sentence analysis of what I thought that quote meant and continued on with my argument. This was quick and gave the reader a reason why my argument had merit. 

The reason I chose to write about this particular aspect of my writing is that I feel it is very important in all of the writing that I do. If I write a paper that doesn't have any evidence to back up my claim, it will be dismissed because I don't show the reader why I have a valid point. Also too much of an outside source takes the reader away from the point I am trying to make. The great part about blogging is that I can practice this technique on a weekly basis in a stress free environment. Also, I have the ability to read my classmates blogs and learn more about outside sources and what works the best. Next semester I hope to continue improving on incorporating outside sources in order to better argue that which I am passionate about.