<![CDATA[Thomas Conner - comm10blogsp16]]>Mon, 16 Mar 2026 00:33:29 -0700Weebly<![CDATA[The power of political persuasion]]>Mon, 30 May 2016 18:21:12 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/the-power-of-political-persuasionThis is an appearance by Scott Adams, creator and writer of the Dilbert comic strip, last week on the weekly "Real Time with Bill Maher" on HBO. I'm sharing it here because Adams discusses exactly some of the things we talked about early in the term relating to framing. The Lakoff exercise I introduced ("Don't think of an elephant!") — this is precisely how Adams claims presidential candidate Donald Trump is (successfully) conducting his discourse. Adams' credentials as an "expert" on persuasion should be debated, but his comments here are directly relevant to our understanding of framing.
]]><![CDATA[Project Part 3: examples and docs]]>Mon, 23 May 2016 17:24:44 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/project-part-3-examples-and-docsThree documents below, available to download, should give you some guidance for the third part of the class project ...
1. Continuing with the previous student's example paper, the model part 3 is posted here. This copy is annotated — I've highlighted some of the main parts your paper must include, which we'll elaborate on in section:
    — Statement of your research questions
    — Explanation of why these questions are important, and who else has
        been asking them (and how)
    — What data will answer your questions
    — How you intend to obtain that data

2. Also, as another example of format, a successful research proposal of mine is posted here. Note the way this is formatted, with labels for each paragraph ("research question," "hypothesis," "related work," etc.); I am perfectly fine with you utilizing this format, if it makes it easier to get your head around the components of a research proposal. (You would not need to include "theoretical contributions" or "risks," unless you had them ready in mind.)

3. Lastly, posted here is the short list of research methods compiled by a previous COMM 10 professor.

I also recommend these books, excellent guides to conceiving of and conducting communication research:

— Rubin, R.B., Rubin, A.M., Haridakis, P.M., & Piele, L.J. (2010). Communication Research: Strategies and Sources. Boston: Wadsworth
— Babbie, E. (2007). The Practice of Social Research. Boston: Wadsworth

Geisel has several copies of the Babbie and a couple copies of the Rubin, all available as of this posting.
]]><![CDATA[Why Gender-Inclusive Language Matters]]>Thu, 19 May 2016 17:22:04 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/why-gender-inclusive-language-mattersHere's the full video that was started in the Wednesday section this week — a good discussion of gender-inclusive language, and where gender-specific language lurks in our discourses. Thanks, Shivani!
]]><![CDATA[Talking to me, myself, and I]]>Sun, 08 May 2016 22:06:27 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/talking-to-me-myself-and-iSo here's a question in light of some of this week's topics: Where's the communication (from whom to whom) when we talk to ourselves?
Goffman actually addressed this ...
He suggests that talking to ourselves reflects badly within the performative context of his communication analysis. In fact, no form of talk is as embarrassing for us as showing that we are not properly engaged with a conversant partner. "Extended self-talk," he says, "if discovered, reflects badly on the talker."

Recent science, however, has had better things to say about self-talk. In a study published in 2012 (and one of those pieces that seems to resurface in my social-media feed every few months), researchers found that "self-directed speech" increased a subject's visual processing. Psychologists, too, claim that talking to yourself "helps you clarify your thoughts, tend to what’s important and firm up any decisions you’re contemplating." Almost a century ago, Mead also outlined how this self (the "personhood" we were discussing in relation to Goffman) takes form, largely through social interaction (a la Goffman). But Mead, too, did not discount the importance of the "I" conversing with the "me" in contributing to the ongoing process of self formation.

And keep in mind: Einstein talked to himself.

Participation! Do you talk to yourself? Most of us do. Think about when this occurs, though (and when we consciously hide it). In light of our discussion about Goffman's interactive process of self-formation, how do you think talking to ourselves contributes to our selves?
]]><![CDATA[The world stage of Goffman & Shakespeare]]>Sun, 08 May 2016 22:02:14 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/the-world-stage-of-goffman-shakespeareCheck out this nifty 2-minute video posted to Aeon (a great online mag), summing up Goffman's thinking about the performative self ...
]]><![CDATA[Project, Part II: Previous student example]]>Mon, 02 May 2016 19:30:36 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/project-part-ii-previous-student-exampleClick here to download part 2 of a former student's project paper.

Again, this is a paper that scored well — though it has significant room for improvement, too. We'll discuss the edited version of this later in class.

Use this paper as a good example of using the denotative and connotative description from part 1 as examples for an analysis of the communication at work in your object. Note how the student incorporated readings from the syllabus and others.
]]><![CDATA[Is pop music repetitive? Is pop music repetitive?]]>Wed, 27 Apr 2016 19:24:45 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/is-pop-music-repetitive-is-pop-music-repetitive
Check out this short video that's highly relevant to our discussion of Adorno & Horkheimer and their hand-wringing about pop music. The video presents information A&H would be down with, claiming that pop music is endlessly repetitive. The kicker, though, is that this mind-numbing repetition is not the direct work of our capitalist overlords — it's our own fault. Well, our own choice.

Participation! Consider the consumer choice discussed in this video's claims. How free are we to choose? How has Internet data illuminated this? And what would Adorko & Jerkheimer say about this: are our choices really our own?
]]><![CDATA[Project, Part I: A previous student's example]]>Thu, 07 Apr 2016 19:40:22 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/project-part-i-a-previous-students-exampleClick here to read/download an A-grade paper from a student in the course from a previous term.

I'm providing this as a model to illustrate the formatting and structure of the assignment. This should make very clear how to set it up: text for the intro (with sources cited), then a two-column table for the denotative vs. connotative descriptions. (Never made a table or used columns in Word before? It's easy.)

Pay attention to how this student telescoped the denotative elements into connotative possibilities. Also, consider that this paper actually could have used more connotations.

Remember: Part 1 of the project is due in week four.

]]><![CDATA[more on semiotics (denotation/connotation)]]>Thu, 07 Apr 2016 19:33:20 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/more-on-semiotics-denotationconnotation
The above song, a one-hit wonder from 1971, is a particularly historically and culturally situated lyrical consideration of signs — in the denotative sense, surely (actual posts and placards containing written messages) but also in various connotative senses.

Semiotics — the study of signification (signs, signifiers, signifieds) can be a lot to get your head around. If you'd like more in-depth background on signs, codes, texts, and more, look to this excellent primer, "Semiotics for Beginners," particularly parts 1, 2, 7, and 9.

Specifically for Part I of the communication analysis project: this link is a PDF of an extra reading (not required, but maybe helpful) from several previous syllabi in COMM 10. Marcel Danesi gives a great summation of the semiotic task you are assigned to accomplish in Part I of the project. Look to "Types of Meaning" beginning on p. 25 for a detailed explanation of denotation and connotation as you'll need to apply it to your selected object of communication.
]]><![CDATA[culture: are you high or low?]]>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 22:51:04 GMThttps://www.thomasconner.info/comm10blogsp16/culture-are-you-high-or-lowThe Wednesday lecture this week introduced the concept of culture and how it can be divided into different levels and claimed by certain social groups. Next week, you'll be reading Stuart Hall, who was instrumental in creating the scholarly field of cultural studies — one of the first academics to suggest that the study of popular culture was as important as examining so-called "high" culture.

Consider the difference between "high" and "low" culture, how those delineations have been presented to you, and where you straddle that line in your daily experience.

Last year, on my personal blog, I looked back at a 1915 essay that was influential in establishing that binary — and the lasting effect it has on America's view of itself and its culture.

Participation! Read the Van Wyck Brooks essay linked there (or here). What do you think about his perspective on American culture? Do we still divide the culture between this binary? For what purpose — what work is that doing, and for whom?
]]>