Homework answers / question archive / RTVF 110: Guide for Choose Your Own Reading Adventure assignments You are asked to complete two “Choose Your Own Adventure” (CYOA) assignments over the semester

RTVF 110: Guide for Choose Your Own Reading Adventure assignments You are asked to complete two “Choose Your Own Adventure” (CYOA) assignments over the semester

Writing

Share With

RTVF 110: Guide for Choose Your Own Reading Adventure assignments You are asked to complete two “Choose Your Own Adventure” (CYOA) assignments over the semester. I expect that these assignments will allow me to gauge your reading comprehension, and it will help you to be prepared to participate each day, having read with a different question in mind each time. • You should post your CYOA response with a title of your chosen article. • Reading response length can vary. Try to write as much as necessary to sufficiently and thoughtfully address the readings and issues the readings are posing. (at least 500 words—of course, you can write more if you want to.) • Any and all ideas that are not your own, including from the reading you are responding to, must be cited. How to write the CYOA Response: Pick two different approaches from below and use them to write your response for one article. For example, you can do argument response and devil’s advocate response for one chosen reading. 1. CONTEXT RESPONSE: What is important about the context of the reading (the time and place it was written)? What was going on in the world at the time, important to how we should understand the reading? What is presented as a new idea? Is there anything important or interesting about them that makes you see the reading in a different light? 2. ARGUMENT RESPONSE: What is the main argument of the paper? What support is given for this argument? (How) is it relevant politically? In other words, what does it say about how people’s everyday lives are structured and organized in contradictory ways by social, economic, political, and cultural relations of power, and is the argument in need of updating for the contemporary context? 3. MAKES ME THINK OF… RESPONSE: What could you not stop thinking about as you were reading this reading? Why is it so relevant to that thing? What does the class material make you think differently about that thing? Be specific about both the thing and the thing’s relationship to the ideas in the reading. Do you think this is an influential reading (or set of ideas)? In what way (is it controversial, influences politics/policy, fielddefining, etc.)? How do you know? 4. OPINION/QUESTION RESPONSE: What is your (professional or non-professional) opinion about the reading (Inspired by it? Angered by it? Excited by it? Difficult? Boring? Important? Surprising)? Provide details and evidence to support your opinion. Then, pose 2 really thoughtful questions you would want to discuss after having read this reading. 5. DEVIL’S ADVOCATE RESPONSE. Why is the paper uninteresting? Boring? Polemical? Bad evidence or logic? Badly written? Can you come up with reasons why this kind of research should not be funded or not be published? Can you find ethical or conceptual issues with the reading? Whichever you choose, make your devil’s advocate argument and evidence it well. 6. COMPARE/CONTRAST RESPONSE: Compare or contrast some major aspect of the reading with another from earlier in the semester. You might discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments, the usefulness of their perspectives, their approaches, their context at time of writing, or something else. Grading criteria The student indicated which article he/she respond to and the response is at least 500 words. The student understood the core argument of the reading and explained it well. The student used two different approaches for his/her response to the reading. The student’s response to the reading is creative and insightful. The student articulated his/her idea in the writing. Points 1 1 1 1 1 Example: Title: The New York Review: Why Trump Is Winning and the Press Is Losing Context Response: What is important about the context of this reading was that it was written in April 2018, a little over a year since Trump has been in office. Meaning, what was mentioned in the article was most likely taken from Trump’s first year in office and how he reacted to the media. The article first starts by giving some background information on how previous political figures dealt with the media and then brings in the new idea of Trump deals with the media. The new idea being instead of criticizing the media for unfair treatment, Trump would start hatred on it. Trump’s daily attacks would be on media sources like The New York Times, The Washington Post, CNN, and CBS calling them failing and corrupt. Yet, media sources like Fox News, The Daily Caller, Drudge Report, Breitbart, and Rush Limbaugh would not get hate from Trump. This is because these sources would silence any critical stories about Trump and would project hate on the journalist who reported stories like this on the president. What is interesting to notice, is that the media sources Trump hated on are left-leaning and the media he does not give hate to are right-leaning. This is important to remember when continuing to read the article because it shows that Trump is being “unfair” in a way because he is only hurting the people going against him. Trump doesn’t have to support what these media sources are saying, but he could just ignore what they post and focus on gaining more supporters. Argument Response: The main argument of this article is that Trump is winning over the press. What this means is that if the press were to release something that did not go in Trump’s favor, then Trump would simply take them down. The support that is given for this is that some of his most harsh moments have been attacks on the press, and calling out reporters and camera crews for abuse during rallies. This is relevant politically because there are three sides when it comes to operating campaigns; Trump supporters, critics of Trump, and neither supporters nor critics of Trump. And for each side, the press feels and works differently towards Trump. For the supporters of Trump, the hate of the media helps view Trump as a fighter for them. For the critics of Trump, Trump works by attacking and hating on them, and it’s the opponent’s job to keep a “war” going between them. Lastly, the third group who neither supports nor criticizes Trump helps dishonor the press by making noise and confusion to find good information. Some argue that journalists are doing their jobs correctly and that their work doesn't even matter because Trump supporters reject it. Along with the fact that tearing down media is not good for our nation and that there is a risk that the press will no longer be a thing in the future if it continues like this. However, this article was written three years ago and we now have a new president in office, so it will be important to watch how Biden reacts to the press over his next four years.