Blog Post 1

Learning to summarize large bodies of work is going to be beneficial to me as we move forward because summarizing shows and understanding of the text that was read. Summarizing can also aid when writing a rhetorical analysis, argumentative paper, or any other kind of response paper because it makes the text into a more manageable size. For example, when working on an analysis in class of the article “Combating Myths about Distance Education”, it was useful to summarize what the article was about before discussing it because it created an understanding and a base for us to build off of. Learning to think critically as a writer and as an individual in society will benefit me greatly. Not only will I be able to read articles, academic works, and books and be able to comprehend and interpret what the meaning is, I will be able to comprehend and interpret what I encounter in society. Through the skills I have picked up, like being able to identify ethos, pathos, and logos, I am more aware of what is happening in the world around me. For example, I can see an advertisement and pick out the appeals made to the audience, me. Learning to view text in different ways shaped my understanding of writing and authorship. Before I identified text only an article, a book, or any higher end writing. Now, I view text as anything that can be interpreted or is directed to an audience. An author does not need to be someone with a published novel or a job in a major newspaper, an author can be anyone with something to say and a way to say it. For example, many people run their own blogs, sharing their thoughts for anyone who wants to read. Though the platform that information is being shared through is different from a newspaper, the information is still relevant and readable by whoever the writer wants to reach.

In his 2011 article “The Shame of College Sports”, Taylor Branch claims college sports are corrupt because college athletes are not paid. In the article “Should College Athletes be Paid? Why, They Already Are” written for Sports Illustrated in 2014, Seth Davis argues why Taylor Branch’s claim is incorrect. Davis begins the article stating his knowledge of previous articles written on the subject. He cites  NPR, MSNBC, and the Business Insider to establish to the readers his own knowledge on the topic of payment in college athletics. Davis’ argument begins when he claims Branch’s article lacks information that does not support the claim he made, that college athletes are not paid but should be. Davis continues his crusade against Branch, claiming college athletes are paid through colleges covering the costs of tuition, food, and boarding. Furthermore, Branch points out most colleges do not profit from their football programs despite the large amount of money they bring in. He continues questioning how college athletes would be paid and who would determine their worth. After all of his arguments through, the one he is most adamant about is why colleges keep their programs despite incurring financial losses, that maybe they keep them for the joy of competition and nothing more.