Blogs, Twitter, Facebook, emails,even YouTube, all offer an outlet and an audience for people to communicate with- if you have a network of people ‘listening’. But what if you don’t?
“Failed networks kill ideas, but successful ones trigger them.” -Clive Thompson
When considering our audience and performance, I would be remiss to not consider Marshall McLuhan‘s theory: The Medium is the Message. The change in the way we communicate (in online spaces) affects the way our ‘viewers’ interpret what we are saying.
Would Shakespeare’s work such as Romeo and Juliet be so profound if it was never enacted upon again, and again through different mediums?
If we did not live in the current technology age- how many people would we be writing and performing for? I’m sure today’s classroom would continue to look as it did during my schooling career. The audience would be limited to my teacher, unless it was speech writing season, in which my classmates might hear what I had to say if I had the ‘top’ arguments in my class.
How are students motivated by the possibility of countless people reading their thoughts and ideas? To me, more importantly, what happens when the aspiring writers/bloggers/vloggers open themselves up to the world- and they are met with silence?
According to Heick perhaps convincing students that people beyond our personal spheres (mothers and teachers) are interested in their writing, leads to under developed, selfish writers. I do much prefer Michael Drennan’s perspective that offering student’s a platform to share their voices help to improve their writing. Additionally, Clive Thompson’s perspective mirror’s this concept nicely. I would like to believe that when we give our student’s a platform to have a voice, that they rise up to the occasion and have a ‘purpose’ for their work.
How do you think the content of our student’s writing adapt because of the potential audience?