Each aspect deserves 5 - 7 sentences or points each. Perhaps more. As Longaker notes, understanding a rhetorical message depends on understanding the presuppositions in which that specific message and the interaction is embedded.

A description of the artifact

Describe the tweet, both the text and image. Consider the date, time, situation. Our focus is on the text and image of the tweet, but the replies (see them on Twitter here will help you infer elements of the situation. For the text, consider length, the nature of the sentence, how the sentence sets up the irony or sarcasm, the level of formality .... (LMS = learning management system: D2L, Blackboard, and others)

This tweet is an ironic opinion. When sending/posting a tweet the intended audience is other twitter users. Tweets can only be 140 characters and this users made his point in fewer than that. His twitter page is dedicated to critisizing web design. In this particular post Alan addresses the poor web design done by "LMS", learning management system. The picture displays a red header and within it reads "access denied" in white lettered highlighted by a grey text box. The time in which the picture, or pop-up, was accessed was August 30th, 2017, at 7 o'clock in the evening. The time in which the tweet was posted was August 30th, 2017, at 4:08 in the evening. This tweet makes ironic sense in two ways, the fact that access was denied for whatever unknown reason and the fact that the tweet time does not match up with the picture, in fact it would've been impossible for the pop-up to occur at the time in which the picture had shown since the tweet was posted before that time. Twitter is a trustworthy site when it comes to being on-time.

the implied rhetor

From the artifact, what can you infer about the implied rhetor? Not just demographic info (which you can discover by searching) but values, beliefs, knowledge ...
One can conclude that this particular user is someone who loves dogs or the creator has intended for this page to be a dog's, critiques web design, and likes biking. They live in Strawberry, Arizona. They have been a member of twitter since January 2007 and they have posted over eleven thousand pictures and videos. With over ten thousand followers it's a surprise to see that this particular tweet only has a few likes and comments. He must have some kind of education in order to get pleasure from critiquing web designs. Since he loves biking he must value exercise. He owns a dog, or is a dog, which might mean that he loves dog or loves animals. Alan is the implied rhetor where as the implied rhetor is the dog.

the intended addressee

From the artifact, what can you infer about the intended addressee? Again, not just basic info but values, beliefs, knowledge ...
Those who view the tweet and those who read it and are interested by it are two different audiences. His ten thousand followers are likely to have viewed the tweet but not everyone would have found it pleasurable/humorous. Kind of like when Longer says that not everyone understand a joke or not everyone believes it to be funny. Those who commented and/or liked the tweet were those who understood the content and found it pleasurable/humorous. The text was towards an intended audience whereas in this case is someone who understands sarcasm. If one does't understand the tweet they are simply irrelevant as a reader. As a further analysis, who are his the thousand followers? Of those ten thousand followers, only about ten people show any kind of connecting interest between Alan and themselves.

the occasion

From the artifact, infer the specific occasion. This is part of kaios, along with the exigence. Something occasions the rhetor to tweet and sp shapes the text.
Something happened in order to make the user, Alan, tweet this photo and caption. He could have been on a website/page, trying to look at something or click on something further and this pop-up appeared having to refuse him to do so. As the outside reader I engaged in the idea of trying to interact with the photo and click on either "cancel" or "login". It might have been an unintended reaction to the audience but to unfamiliar twitter users this could happen. Understanding that the picture is necessary in order to get the tweet is crucial.


the exigence

From the artifact, infer the exigence.
What needs to be discussed between the rhetor and the audience is the the picture, The tweet is simply a caption on the user's opinion of the picture and the situation behind it.
The tweet and the picture go hand in hand. Those who will understand this tweet the best will be those who understand sarcasm, LMS, and enjoy it. Nothing needs to be discussed because the situation and occasion that occurred is quite obvious.

the kind of discourse

Deliberative, judicial, epideictic. There are two kinds of discourse involved - one in words and text, and another in image - that need to be taken together to determine the kind.
Epideictic.

the forum and genre

This is going to need some consideration. It's not enough to note that the forum is Twitter. Consider the aspects of that forum that the rhetor uses to shape the artifact. Spend some time considering the 140 character limit, for instance; the structure of following others; the use of an image.
Twitter is the forum. The genre could be sarcasm, and tweet with a screenshot, or a humorous tweet.

the physical material

Even texts on screens have physical presence. They are on various screens on devices. On large screens, texts show up on windows they share with other texts and images. Digital messages also have physical side in their creation: cameras, on-screen or physical keyboards. So creating tweets has a physical dimension that influences the rhetorical construction and reception of the message. How is the rhetor using these?
In order the view the picture one needs to click it to make it bigger. I used my mouse, I used my keyboard. I probably had to use my charger and an outlet as well because this assignment took a while.

the presuppositions

Draw on what you have inferred from your consideration above and what can discover readily by reviewing the twitter stream. The more you develop this, the more you will understand the text and how it works rhetorically.
There are no comments on this page.
Valid XHTML :: Valid CSS: :: Powered by WikkaWiki