Like Doug Eyman, who began this blog carnival a few weeks ago, I started trying to define the phrase “digital rhetoric” about a decade ago.
There were already many conversations going on in which the phrase was being bandied about.
“Big data.” It’s in the air. For instance, IBM claims that ”[e]very day, we create 2.5 quintillion bytes of data—so much that 90% of the data in the world today has been created in the last two years alone.” In 2008, Nature ran an interesting special on big data.
I thought that things would change once I received my PhD. Not large things, mind you, but meaningful things, nonetheless. Things like panel moderators introducing me as Dr. Yergeau rather than an inspiring young adult with a special story. Things like psychologists talking to me at a rate higher (yes, HIGH- ER-) than seven words per minute.
Extra, extra! Read all about it! Announcing the 2012 Computers & Writing Reviews.
Thanks to an amazing team of 14 reviewers and 3 editors, responding to tight deadlines and quick turnarounds with grace and aplomb, the latest edition of the C&W Reviews is ready for your viewing pleasure.
Digital rhetorics1 provide a vast suite of generating principles. These principles are difficult to collect into a simple model, much less to name, substantiate, and prioritize. Fortunately, difficulties like these are much of what motivates digital rhetorics scholarship (some of which was reviewed by others in previousentries), and they are also what I find both exciting and challenging about the field.