Week 16 Question 1

In chapter 13 I found ethnography. With ethnography, a research is able to engage themselves in a culture while observing norms within this culture. Ethnography is about a researcher emerging themselves into this sub culture or society and intergrate themselves with the group of people. This type of research is difficult for researchers to find their way into the so called door that can gain access into the community for ethnography research. It is interesting how the researcher must account for their biases before, after, and during the process of this type of research. I have heard of researchers do this type of risky research with social groups such as mafias, underground fight clubs, or even traveling with professional athletic teams. This type of exposure and access can bring a good amount of truth if the data is collected in a valid way.
I wish there were more of these type of studies and research methods done in a longitudinal fashion. I believe there would be more insight in reporting and research that can improve our understanding of cultures and sub cultures.

Week 16 Question 1

Question #3

 I found the section on listening most interesting in the book.  Learning how receivers can improve decoding and the different ways to listen helped me a lot on a personal level.  I learned that listening takes skill and mental effort.  The book gives great advice explaining how we should remind ourselves to give our attention to those who are talking to us.  I started using this approach of consciously reminding myself to use good listening skills and it proved to be a good reminder and I feel my conversations have bee better.

 The book went into improving retention and revival.  In learning how to decide what needs to be stored in our memory can improve our retention.  One way to do this is to rehearse  and review ideas that need to be stored.  Note taking and reviewing the thoughts one listens to mentally can help improve retention.  Paraphrasing, or repeating a message in your own words so that speaker can check your understanding and asking important question will improve retention.  These little listening tips seemed easy to do and I felt this was the most interesting concepts in the book.  Most textbooks go over the basics of active listening.  The text for this class went deeper into listening and explained the value of improving retention, improving interpretation, and improving attention.

Week May 10-13 Question 3

  Pick one other concept in the book that you feel needs further discussion?

  I thought the book needs to further discuss characteristics of media messages.  The book could go into more detail about specific messages that the media uses to deliver the mood of the medium. Exploring how directors transition, use colors, graphics, sounds, and overall look of sets and shows have a major influence on how the audience reacts to certain signals.  One of the tactics I see in the media today is taking a story and dragging the story out for weeks and months at a time.  There are certain strategies and tactics the media uses to give a story legs through production.  There is an art to interviewing that the book did not go into. Interviewing tactics are a valuable skill that people in business and the media use that can help us become more savvy and understand in the communication process. I think interviewing people on TV, the radio, and in a business setting are interesting to watch when a skilled person conducts and interview.  But, when an interview goes wrong it can be akward and a loss of momentum in the communication process.

Week of April 29-May 2 Question #3

I found the selective exposure section of this chapter interesting and an ongoing part of our society. Selective exposure is people's tendencies to avoid certain messages and to seek out others. The book uses the example of music taste and the radio stations we listen to. A person who likes hard rock will probably not turn the channel and listen to country music. The same can be said for people and their politics. How often do people listen to the opposite side of their political party. We often believe we are open minded people but we do not expose ourselves to other messages. If we do exposure ourselves to other messages how often do we have an open mind when listening to these opposing messages?
I feel our society is quick to judge and less likely to listen. Whenever a celebrity or public figure is shown in the news for something negative people tend to believe everything the media tells them. It is true that public figures are deemed guilty until proven innocent. Our media can do a better job of checking their sources and providing clear facts. The media is a business and too often they will sensationalize stories because it gets ratings. Maybe if our media would do a better job of monitoring their selective exposure in their reporting and production it could carry over to society.

Week of April 29-May 2 Question 2

Sadly I tend to agree that Marshall McLuhan is correct in stating the medium is the mesage. I feel messages are stonger through production and format than content. People use the phrase "pictures are worth a thousand words", works for our instant gratification and TV lifestyle. The mosaic logic that bombards us with changing bits of information we cognitively assemble influences our ideas and rational with the programing. Casting personalities in forms of media has a lot to do with the sucess of the medium. Celeberties such as Paris Hilton, Bill O Riley, and even Oprah have found themselves in a character that attracts attention. Their success comes from their personna rather than what they say.
Instant gratification is becoming a major part in how our media communicates with its followers. This idea that television is this cool medium has some validity but, I think there are a lot of variations to this cool medium. TV is increasing its production cuts on all types of shows today. Watch any news show, sporting event, and drama andthe production styles of todays shows and the frequency of cuts are more frequent than past productions. TV does not want us to lose our attention spans. Instead of dialouges, TV has more effects, camera changes, and motion. The medium is sending multiple quick messages that fill the gap of conversations. I am skeptical that TV content is going to improve. I wonder how future programing is going to change. If the current trend continues, programing will continue to lack the human elements and drama that made TV great in the begining.

Week of April 29-May 2 Question 1

I have not made friendships that exist exclusively in cyberspace. I do keep in contact with people on facebook, myspace, and email but the people I communicate with online I also talk to them on the phone. The Internet is different in that I have a small idea with what is going on with people' lives because of their status on these social networks.

I have not formed cyber relationships because I am lucky enough to have a core group of friends that I do not have to communicate through the Internet. I do not want to sound conceded or lazy but I feel I have enough close friends I feel I do not wish to put the effort into having a cyber relationship. After seeing the movie You Got Mail, they had to talk all the time to proceed with their friendship. I feel meeting people face to face and spending 20 minutes with a person would equal five or six messages back and forth. Why go through such a methodical means of communication when a phone call or face to face meeting can advance one further in the relationship. I believe that too often people look for compatibility in our friends through people's profiles. I believe too often people today look for compatibility by examining people's Internet profiles. Most of my great friendships come from personal experiences and social events. If I looked at some of my friends profiles on the Internet I would not have chosen to communicate with some of my good friends. It is important for our society to not get too wrapped up in cyberspace relationships. Good old fashioned face to face interaction can give us the best indication of compatibility.

Week of April 12-18 Question #3

Organizational communication is interesting to examine. The book talks about tight and lose coupling. Organizations are very different in how they are set up and the flow of communication is affected by the segments of each department. I have been a part of organizations where information was passed along freely but unorganized. Sometimes this had the telephone game affect and information would turn into misinformation. Other organizations would have little clusters of people working in groups. When multiple clusters or multiple departments of an organization came together communication was lost or not transferred from one department to another.
It is important that the lines of communication are set up and organized for people and departments to filter appropriate information. In today's organizations typically this communication is passed by email and instant messaging. It is important that an organization goes over appropriate communication standards and procedures when using these communication tools.
I find that organizations that go over specifics in who, what, where, when, why, and how different departments and people should communicate have a clear understanding of how to interact and work within the organization. The book went into some detail about the differences of employees roles such as isolates, liaison, bridge, etc. but, I found the book to be too matter a fact and absolute in characterizing peoples roles. Organizations do have an hierarchy of status but, people go through different roles during projects and on multiple projects. I felt the book tried to put people into categories instead of focusing on how organizations can maneuver and adjust to communication and role changes that constantly occur.

Week of April 19-25 Question #2

The etiquette of the cell phone is most commonly involved in my everyday life. I actually do not mind when people interrupt a current conversation if the phone call is important and needs to be answered at that particular moment. What is frustrating is when the phone call is irrelevant and ruins the momentum of the conversation. I really dislike when people text in dark places. They feel that since they are texting they are not distracting others. When I go to a movie or indoor concert and the lights are off the bright screen is distracting. Just because someone is not talking on the phone the bright screen is distracting in a dark and quiet environment.
My pet peeve with answering machines is when people do not leave their name. There are basically two three people in my life that don't have to leave their name my girlfriend, Mom, and Dad. I have many other close friends I keep in touch with and I would recognize their voices. But, it is ridiculous to assume the person on with the message knows who is calling by your voice. Even if they have a cell phone or caller ID. It is rude and I feel a little arrogant.
I never have any problems with beepers any more. Most of the time it is people with next tells that have alter sounds when they are at work. It does not really bother me much. The only time it bothers me is when people are definitely off work or not answering their phone and fail to turn off their alerts. For example, there are people who get an alert but are in a situation where they are not going to answer their phone. Instead of turning off their alerts they just ignore all their alerts one after another! If your not going to answer your phone then turn off your beeper after the first alert.
I have never had to be on a conference call in my life. The example of the book seems to go hand in hand with my pet peeve of people not giving their name with their messages. It would be frustrating if you are on a conference call and spend more time guessing who is talking than listening to what the person is saying.
I do not really have a problem with call waiting as long as people use it responsibly. Just because someone gets a call on another line does not mean that person must respond. Call waiting should be used if really necessary. I will typically answer call waiting if I get the same person calling multiple times during a conversation. Then I usually know that it is probably appropriate to put a person on hold. Yet, call waiting should not be done within the middle of a thought or topic that will kill the momentum of a conversation.
I enjoy having the option of call waiting, email, fax, etc. With new technology and new ways to communicate should come basic etiquette that is acceptable to the specific means of one is communicating. Just as talking in people different social settings have different types of etiquette and language. Each technology has their own set of ethical standards that should be upheld.

Week of April 19-25 Question #1

Organizations are tied to their environment in that they depend on their surroundings for resources. An organization effects its environment in an economic and cultural way. Economically organizations can bring in other businesses that will fulfill the needs of the organization and it's employees. An example would be coffee shops or fitness centers opening businesses in the same community because new employees in the community have needs for their morning coffee and a place to work out after work. An organization can impact the type of culture when an organization takes the personality of the community. Silicon Valley has a different type of culture than the mining towns of West Virginia. The type of people at the organization does shape attitudes and business culture.
The school I attend does impact the city of San Jose. San Jose State University is a commuter college. In response to the culture of the University San Jose has many forms of public transportation for people to make their way into downtown San Jose and the university. Since parking spaces are a problem the university has build parking garages and has parking lots off campus with buses that transport students to the college. Part of the San Jose State environment is dealing with the parking situation because of the culture of it's students.
I feel a university has an ethical obligation to produce students that can help with the type of jobs that make up the city. I feel San Jose state has a responsibility to have top notch computer programming and technology driven degrees. San Jose is the premier hub to technological businesses and computer programing it is only right for the university to produce students that can get jobs and live in the community they went to college in. The university should interact with the community. It should be an asset instead of a nuisance. Students can work while they go to school, stay in local housing, and intern in local businesses. Both culturally and economically a university has an obligation to improve communities.

Week April 12-18 Question #1

I believe the competitive symmetry would be the most difficult and most damaging type for a relationship. It would be difficult for two people who naturally compete with one another to be able to compromise on most decisions. In this type of relationship the two people involved will compete with each other for the sake of out doing one another. This type of couple would find it hard to admit when they are wrong. When two competitive people are in an argument and one person is wrong the person who is right can rub in their correct decision in the other's face. This out doing each other can be taxing on any relationship. The couples who typically have this dilemma are the one 's who fight all the time.
I think the rigid complementary relationship has the most potential to damaging the self esteem of the people in the relationship. When the people in the relationship resent their status their self esteem can be affected negatively. The person who is dominant will constantly feel like they are the bad guy and the less dominant role feels like they have no say or voice in the relationship. This type of situation doesn't give the freedom for each person in the relationship to have influence and confidence when making decisions.

Week of March 29 - April 4 Question #2

The rationality premise is difficult to believe 100%. That fact that most people are capable of discovering truth through logical analysis is a little to grey for me. When throwing out terms such as truth and logical analysis is circumstantial. We can argue that what is logical and truthful for an American Indian living in Montana is different for a 18 year old that has grown up in New York City their entire life. The environment we are raised in determines so much of what is made up of our idea of logical reasoning. I do agree that most people are capable of using their own individualistic reasoning to come to a truth. But, I think truth or logical analysis are too strong of adjectives. Off the top of my head I would say people are capable to reason or analyze. But, to say that there is truth or logic is too much of a grey area for my taste.
In looking at perfectibility I am not sure about the whole we are all born in sin thing. But, I generally agree that we are all capable of achieving goodness through effort and control. The problem is there are a few of us humans that need a tremendous amount of effort and control to achieve goodness. Even good people can become greedy and selfish. In taking a line out of the Batman movie, "Sometimes there are people that just want to watch the world burn," I guess I am more of an optimist in that I believe we are all possible of goodness. It is up to the people of our society to put forth the extra amount of time and effort to get through to those people that becomes difficult to find goodness.
The mutability premise is the easiest for me to believe. The idea that human behavior is shaped by environmental factors and we can improve people's circumstances by improving their psychological and physical circumstances in improving their environment. The other side to this argument is that some of the highest achieving people in our cultures are those who came from difficult environments and motivated them to reach a high level of success based on the difficult environment they grew up in. But, on the whole improving people's psychological and physical circumstances will change a person's images of themselves.

Week March 29-April 4 #1

I do agree with Ruth Benedict's quote that we are "creatures of our culture" and that our habits, beliefs, and impossibilities are shaped by our culture. It seems to me that it is our human nature to feel a sense of belonging. Living in any human society or community has cultural norms that we in some forms learn innately. Often we view what is right and wrong in how we interact within our culture. An example of this is when people categorize people who dress in tight fitting clothes and lose baggy clothes. The culture that people grew up in can have a major impact in the way a person wears their clothing.
I feel the most glaring truth that we are "creatures of our culture" is the shaping of our identities. Often you can find people that are Asian that use chopsticks when eating. They know how to use a fork and they might have spend their entire lives in the United States. But, their culture has always used chop sticks because it dates back to their grandparents and their culture.
Our habits, beliefs, and impossibilities are shaped by our culture in many ways. Religion can be a powerful part of shaping people's beliefs and daily habits. Other examples of our habits shaped by our culture is our government and the media. This is a more wide spread idea but, the items we buy and the cars we drive can be status symbols which is an example of cultural identification.
Breaking from our cultural limitations would require people to allow themselves to become more venerable. I always hear people talk about how other European cultures are more accepting than Americans. It is a part of the European culture for people to travel and explore different societies. To separate ourselves from our cultural norms people must be willing to remove themselves from what is comfortable and try new things. This is a difficult concept for our small clusters of cultures in the U.S. because our motivations can be largely built on making things easier and obtaining luxuries. There would need to be a social change for people to consciously make an effort to exert themselves in new surroundings. I feel our schools can do a better job of putting students in to different cultures and situations. These out of comfort experiences can change people in a more profound way than watching movies and reading textbooks.

Week of March 8-14 #3

One of the more interesting things I encountered in the reading is when the book talks about spacing. In my own life I do not really look into people's body language as much as I like to examine how much space a person takes up. It is funny to watch people when they are confident or like what they talk about and their actions become bigger and take up more space. Some people automatically take up a lot of space when in a group of people or talking to any particular person.
On the other hand there are lots of people who tend to avoid situations and can seclude themselves in a group, room, or in their own body language with the amount of space their body exudes. It seems to be true that in professional settings the head of the table usually has the highest authority. In this position they are given the most space. Everything in our culture represents space. The most expensive seats in entertainment events are the suites or boxes at events. These suites give people the most space while others sit next to each other shoulder to shoulder. First class and coach on plane flights is an another example and I could go on to others.
People and the relationship to the space they occupy and are given are interesting when watching people interact. It is an easy way to examine who is confident or holds the highest rank among the group. It is not a full proof theory sometimes people who receive the most space are excluded from the conversation. It is interesting to watch.

Week of March 8-14 Question 2

In some Arab countries when you show the bottom of your foot to others it is disrespectful. This usually happens when people cross their legs when sitting down and the leg that is crossed on top has the bottom of their shoe showing to the person they are interacting with. I see people in the U.S. sitting in this position frequently and is considered normal and OK. But, this body position of showing the bottom of their shoe is a sign of disrespect in some Arab countries.
I have coached and played sports with a person from Japan and another from Korea and they have had some difficulties adjusting to the interaction in sports. The most notable nonverbal interest came from the interaction between them and their teammates. When people would celebrate or greet each other we would give one another a high five, slap on the back, handshake. fist pound, or even a hug. This contact was uncomfortable for these two guys to get used to. They became very uncomfortable at first with all the touching that goes on in celebrating. As time went on they got used to some of the intricacies that occur during sports. They seemed to like the fist pound. It was limited in the lack of contact they had with other people yet they were still able to fit in with how they interacted with their teammates.

Week of March 8-14 Question 1

I remember a couple of times when I misinterpreted people's nonverbal cues. I remember one of my superiors would move their body away from me and put down their head whenever I asked them a favor or permission for something. I got the feeling every time I asked this person a question I was wasting their time or they did not care what I had to say. Later on, a couple situations came about that I would normally advise myself to this superior and I didn't because I always seemed to be a nuisance when ever I asked a question. The next day my superior wondered why I didn't come to them when I had to do this task. It turned out that he did listen to me and valued my work. It was just his body language and short answers that threw me off. I began to become more comfortable with their body language and tone and became more open and comfortable around my superior.
To increase one's accuracy in reading people's body language I think it is important to look for consistencies. Sometimes I think we jump to conclusions or look for the obvious body language clues when they do not make up that certain individual. Studying a person over time and reading their consistencies are a good key to becoming accurate in reading nonverbal behavior. In understanding my superior I learned that he acted this way with everyone that came and talked to him. Because I did not study him around different individuals I got lost in my own inaccurate interpretation.

Week of March 1-7 Question 3

In this chapter I got a lot out of is improving retention. I thought about how the reading looked at making a conscious effort to tell yourself to stay focused and divert yourself to be focused on what is present. An example would be this very moment as I write about improving retention my mind as and can easily wonder about other homework, what I have going on tomorrow, and my plans for next week.
I liked the advice of the book when they talked about having a clear and purpose in mind upon entering a listening situation. This is very similar to goal setting in our everyday lives. In each instance that is required for myself to understand what I am listening for and what the purpose of this interaction is about then it actually frees up my thoughts and allows myself to get something out of the interaction. My purpose for listening to a speech on budgets for my work requires a different purpose of listening to my friend talk about the Sharks or the A's.
By listening for understanding can free myself from making too many prejudgements while someone is talking. I think our society is an individual and at times selfish society. Most of our life is totally geared toward our own personal benefit. This kind of attitude leaks into our ability to listen. People seem to have a growing problem in thinking about what they are going to say next instead of listening to what the person is saying. An example of this is listening to the rapid fire news shows that happen everyday. People argue without hearing what they even have to say. Active listening and retention could help our interaction a daily basis.

Week of March 1-7 Question #1

I would argue that once we hit a certain age in our lives it is impossible to perceive others without some sort of judgement or categorization. I am not an expert but, I feel when I was about 13 years old I had some form of judgments based on my perceptions of people through experience, TV, media, and reading materials. I think it would be impossible to have a pure 100% nonjudgmental attitude to the people I see. But, this does not mean I have a close mind or I was/am unwilling to have a person or group prove or disprove the little judgments that go through one's mind when listening or observing an individual. In today's society I feel it would be naive of myself to say that person prototypes, constructs, and scripts have not affected a general idea I would have about a person. Whether these judgments be conscious or unconscious.
I feel the best way to make our judgements more fair can come from being media savvy and having an open mind. The media in the news, movies, TV shows, radio, comedians, reading, and advertising exposes us to person prototypes every day if not every five minutes. If a comedian makes a reference to a gender or race, it is doing so to make a funny observation or statement. But, just because a comedian makes a statement doesn't make it true for every circumstance. I try to remember there is an exception to every rule. The same goes for how we judge others. If I constantly walked away from people because of personal constructs I would have never met some of the closest friends in my life or some of my most important professional contacts.

Putting it plainly, keeping an open mind can over come our judgements. I feel it is even more important to accept that we are influenced by outside judgements. We are going to be introduced and influenced by advertisements, media, and our past experiences. It does not always make our judgements right or wrong. But, accepting these judgements help keep an open mind to our preconceived judgments.

Week of March 1-7 Question #2

I do agree that in some areas men and women use language differently. The book talks about rapport talk and report talk. Rapport talk refers to relational meaning and report talk refers task oriented talks. I agree with the book in that women use conversation to build a relationships and mend tend to find a solution or concentrate on completing a task.
In my personal experience I agree with the books findings when comparing subjects talked about by a group of women and subjects talked about by a group of men. When I am surrounded by a majority of women who are conversing the topics tend to focus on family, relationships, and all around gossip. When I am around my friends or a group of males I don't really know when usually find some topic of common ground when we talk about sports and what is in the news.
I believe these differences are social and cultural in how are society expects men and women to act. Yet, it is fun and encouraging to read about what the specific differences are. This was a topic that I can learn from and use in my everyday life.

Chapter 9 Question 2

When thinking about President Obama's success as a powerful speaker I think he possess creditability, attractiveness, and power in his speeches. I find the power in his presentations to be the best attribute when weighing against creditability and attractiveness. This could be a little surprising to some because his demeanor is not aggressive and does not speak in aggressive tones. Yet, he establishes power in his speeches because of his confidence and clear message. He constantly refers to the past of American history and uses their examples to be inspirational or common remedies to how we can approach our problems today. He gains his power because our in our current situation our country is looking for someone to take control and lead us in the right direction. His plan, style, and creditability has convinced the majority of our country to put our faith in his decisions.
Obama has built ethos in the area of creditability with knowledge and a deep and genuine concern for the people of our country. His speeches give personal examples in his life how he relates to our struggles. A major strength as a speaker has been his ability to communicate his concern and intent to help the people of our country.
Of course attractiveness is a major part of his ability to communicate. His overall health was a factor in differentiating himself from McCain in the election. People became familiar with Obama because of his slogans and ability to reach new audiences through the Internet.
These are some of the reasons that has led to our President making legendary speeches and influencing so many people in such tough times.

Chpater 9 Question 1

The best speaker that I have ever heard was my college baseball coach. What made this particular speaker influential and dynamic was his ability to think he was talking directly to you. Timing is critical when a speaking to a group. He seemed to understand the pulse of the group and understand the timing when his message was going to be received. It wasn't that my coach was real emotional or gave us this great story. The presentation of their delivery was honest and committed. I could see that this person believed to the core of their being that they believed what they were saying was going to help the team. Usually he would give examples of situations of when to apply his methods to real life experiences. His leadership skills were exceptional because in every talk he gave to us he talked about his principals were something greater than himself. I think most speakers believe talk and motivate to get a result of what they desire. But, this person in particular always addressed messages that go beyond sports, having success, and playing well. In most instances his message would be about playing the game but it would resonate with character, personal relationships, and how we go about our daily lives. It was his timing, content, and delivering a message that was insightful to our everyday lives.
The worst speaker I ever heard happened to also be a coach. He would do all these antics and try to get us emotionally involved. But, in his speeches he would make claims that were totally false. Saying absurd things that this was the biggest day of your life, or you will never forget this moment. He was right I never forgot those moments because they had no effect on my life. These stupid emotional talks may have motivated someone for a little while but, had no greater meaning. Most of his talks and messages were very cliche. He would just add a bunch of common phrases or quotes and nothing would really make sense. It was like he took all of the cliche sayings in one speech and felt that would solve all our problems or get us ready to play. There was just no direction in his speech.
I still listen to interviews and speeches in politics or managers in a work environment and they have no point or message in their words. In my experience I prefer people who discuss and examine a couple of points clearly and drive home a common message. Most people will throw information into a talk and have no real direction of their language. It seems when people try to make a world changing speech they usually fail. But, those who go make a speech to answer a question or focus on solving a problem are usually the ones who surprise us and become the talks that stick with us the longest.

Chapter 9 Question 3

I found that creditability is an interesting part of public speaking from the reading. I relate to creditability on an everyday basis at my work or as a graduate student in presenting my research. A person who does not have an impressive resume or a lot of notoriety on subjects yet it is important to establish creditability to your audience.
The book explained that audiences will have preconceived notions about a speaker. The audiences notions are based off of direct experience, advance publicity, or information. In my case, I have not had a lot of direct experience compared to my peers and definitely lack publicity. It is apparent that the creditability of a speaker in my position must come with the effective use of valid information.
Even with great information people can be turned off right away from the lack of experience or publicity. Which lead most of my interest to the introduction of the presentation. The introduction is described in the book as a tool for, "creating a desire in the audience to listen to the speech. (pg. 280)" The ability for a speaker to understand it's audience and provide an engaging exciting introduction is critical for any young or inexperienced speaker. Having a technique such as offering a person allusion or greeting, asking a rhetorical question, using a quotation, telling a humorous anecdote, etc. are great examples. I really like the idea of personal allusion or a reflective story that isn't too long. I always seem to be engaged when a person tells a short interesting story.
From the reading and in my experience creditability will bring active listeners. But, a lack of creditability in the beginning can bring in an audience with great information and an effective introduction.

Chapter 9 Question 3

the social constructionist perspective

Building words in the social constructionist structure looks at norms, rules, symbolic gestures and views that make up communication. These "codes" can represent an off brand of communication that makes communication different in various cultures. I feel an easy example is using slang language. There are words or phrases that represent a king of language in many of our professional and social networks. People of wall street talk in a different language than a construction worker in the Midwest. They both speak in English but, there language is different. Words are built in these networks or communities that can influence acceptance, roles within the specific community, and an almost validation that you know what you are talking about because you can construct the language of a certain community.
In the U.S. we have come a long way in the way we talk to different genders. Women have been nationally accepted as equals in workplaces. Granted there are numerous examples of women being disrespected in the workplace whether it be in language or pay but, these are different issues. But, women are talked to in a respectful manner that other countries and cultures in the world still do not label women as capable in a workplace environment.
The military is an interesting structure that differs from our society norms. In today's environment people question authority more. In military ranking supervisors carry orders without question as long as it does not disrupt their moral compass. Communication is direct and talked in a lot of code and slang. But, this is efficient and necessary for their position. A military must be able to act quickly and possible defend through the use of force. In their line of work there is not any room for dissension, hesitation, and individual interpretation to their task. I am not a military expert and will not begin to pretend to know that our communication style is a major reason why we tend to have a formidable military. I do know that their constructionist style is applicable to their jobs.
I find that we change hats a lot and have to talk differently in different social situations. The words we use in language constantly change due to our situations. For instance I knew a teacher that was very professional and would hardly give a glimpse into their individual views or give an idea of what they were about as a person. Later on after taking this teacher's class I came into contact with them socially and found this person to be an extremely dynamic and charismatic person. The constructionist method is interesting. It is difficult for me to accept that people do not experience the world directly or what we know and believe about the world comes to us through communication rather than direct experience. I personally believe my direct experience has greatly shaped my communication with others. Yet, a social constructionist perspective has a place that studies our communication process in the use of representing our communication symbolically, cognitively, and culturally.

The Pragmatic Perspective

Analyzing communication as a patterned interaction can be very tricky. I feel the textbook gave a good example of pragmatic communication when a couple has constant problems. The textbook also mentions that pragmatic communication is a good rule of thumb when analyzing communication in small groups. I find it difficult that pragmatic communication is the dominant perspective when analyzing communication. Peoples roles and status can differ their communication technique and language. People do play games during communication and there this sort of progression that brings us to the end of a conversation. But, people bring a lot of other factors to the table that may not have any pragmatic relevance.
Communication is like a game in that situations of communication can go through this dance or progression of responses that eventually resolves the agenda of a conversation. If a conversation was in progress and an employee wanted to ask his/her boss for a raise their would be a progression throughout the conversation that would start with a greeting, a lead up to the pitch, the ask, the response to the request, and the conclusion or verdict from the boss. But, to get an answer to the question their is a logical progression of events that can either help the conversation or hurt the conversation.
Communication is not like a game in that some people are very straight forward or have no intention of going through the procedures of pragmatic communication. I feel that from this portion of the textbook people could read too much in the events of the conversation instead of what the person is "really" trying to say. I find in my experience is when communication stumbles is when people misinterpret of what people are trying to say. I do not entirely know if pragmatic perspective will be the correct method of analyzing a communication problem. Never the less pragmatic is a unique way to look at communication. It can be extremely useful in learning how deal with others. The real talent is understanding when it is relevant to look into the pragmatic method to see real results in communication.

The Greeks believed that to be an orator, an individual had to be morally good. Comment on whether you agree or disagree.

I believe it is crucial that an orator be one that is morally good. At times it is imperative that an orator set aside their own views and assumptions and report the truth. Because most of Greek society was translated by word of mouth it is imperative that orators have the ability to provide information that would not be taken out of context.
Morality can become tricky and a lose definition. An orator can make an argument to announcements, theories, and stories that can dramatically change the context of their information without changing any of the facts. Characteristics such as tone, pace, order, and emotion and drastically change the significance of any story or thought. The orator did not change the information but, their presentation can change its significance and direction. Some orators might feel they did not break any code of morality since they did not change any facts. Morality must be detached from the orators personal agenda and views unless they are desired.
The question I have is how the Greeks established creditability and accountability for these orators? It is one thing to demand that orators live up to a high standard of morality but, who and how were these virtues up held? Never the less, I agree that morality should be a demanded virtue of orators.
The morality of orators is a perfect example of truth, goodness, and public communication relating to honest virtues. Informing the public to honest and significant information is vital to the authenticity of our communication in business, media, and person to person communication. Informing our society through the use of various media outlets acts as a our accountability check for the way our businesses operate and how our country is run. But, who holds the media accountable? Sure there are laws and regulations but, the fault mainly relies on the professionalism and morality of the reporter. Obtaining information that is valid and honest is the purpose of our reporters. But, too often we see people spinning the information to increase an entertainment value in order to seem more interesting and gain attention. While their is a purpose for "dressing up" stories and reporting in an entertaining fashion. These attributes cannot refrain from changing the facts by use of tone, pace, order, or any other trick we can use to carry attention to what makes the report significant.
Reporting is a powerful tool of communication. It's misuse can change public opinion and our history. A sense of morality is vital to all forms of communication.

The speaker I admire has to be Barack Obama. I feel in most instances President Obama uses a logo style to persuade his audience. The logos style refers to a public speaker that persuades others through the wording and logic of the message. Although his most famous and memorable speeches were very emotional and moving (more of a ethos approach). President Obama speeches are clear and direct. Politics can be manipulative, complex, and argumentative. But, President Obama has the ability to clearly argue his points and reach a wide audience. The combination of his assertiveness and calm demeanor provide confidence and belief in his message. No matter what one's political views are or their opinion of our current President, I find it difficult for one to argue against President Obama ability as a fantastic communicator. His style and message has influenced millions around the world.

I think Aristotle's classification does work for President Obama. I have a hard time putting him into one category. He is such a dynamic and versatile speaker that he can weave in and out of Aristotle's classifications. His ability to switch classifications for the setting, audience, and tone of his argument make President a favorite of mine. His tone in an interview may differ than when he is speaking to millions of people. Yet President Obama continues to be consistent in being clear and concise. Qualities that I believe Aristotle would approve of.

I feel one quality than can make me a persuasive communicator is the ability to reason with opposing opinions contrast to my view of an argument. When making an argument or stating my case with others, I always try to put myself in the other person's position and try to understand what motivates them to their point of view. I feel this is always an intelligent thing to do because the other person could very well have a better opinion or solution than myself. But, I have found that if I can put myself in the other person's vantage point before I make an argument my argument tends to come off stronger. Actively listening to the other side of an argument is something a lot of people fail to do. Listening to people's counter arguments will typically open opportunities to make a stronger counter argument. Most people are concerned with what they are going to say next they miss vial clues or opportunities to relate and argue your points because they simply do not listen. I have learned this is vital to becoming influential.

introduction

Hello classmates. I am Chad Ross and I am a graduate student at SJSU. I recieved my BA in mass communications from Oklahoma City University. My current graduate studies are in Sport Management.