Reading this chapter helped me be more conscious of what and
how I link I to any online written pieces.
Now that we’re on to “Web 2.0, from the read-only web to the read-write
web” everything is more interactive (42). Instead of the computer only working
one way, it’s now an interactive process between the reader and writer. I guess I never took the time to think about
this since it’s always been a part of my life in this aspect. Since it is so interactive, however, whatever
we put on our websites, blogs, articles, etc. will reflect on us a person. Referring back to the case study on pages
41-42, depending on what we link to we can persuade an audience to feel a
certain way or we can give a depiction of our own opinion.
This can be good and
bad. Positively it allows us to link to
related resources if our audience wants to read more about something. This could be other sites or even to our own
previous blog posts. These links could
also be a bad thing; if we link to a website whose author doesn’t have any
credentials and we’re doing a scholarly-type article, or hyperlink to a blog or
site that’s not the respectable, it puts us in a bad light. Being careful, looking for credentials if we
need them or making sure everything on a site is appropriate before we link to
it would be a great way to solve any problems before they start.
Going back to being able to interact with each other online,
the online community between bloggers –or a blogroll— was something I never
noticed. I’m not an avid blogger and
don’t necessary know how to maneuver around on someone’s blog once I find one
that interests me. I’m actually really
interested in figuring out how to create an elaborate blog or website and join
online community. Again, it would be
important to make sure the blogs in my blogroll are respectable and appropriate,
but overall I think it’s a great way to promote other people’s work and your.
No comments:
Post a Comment