Cross-Cultural Blog

Today the University of Sydney's Page to Screen class meets Stanford University's The Rhetoric of Research.

I'm trying to think of a catchy title for the experience, riffing on Rebecca Johinke's title for her course. Perhaps the videoconference is "From Classroom to Screen"? Or "Screen into Classroom"? Or "The Terministic Screen" (that's a rhetoric reference).

How about "In Marratech, No One Can Hear You Screen?" Let's hope not.

Both classes will be asked to document their reflections on the experience by commenting on this post.

Image: the Marratech interface, taken in Wallenberg Hall, Stanford, during the 2nd Annual Symposium on Cross-Cultural Rhetoric, June 9, 2008.

Here's a group photo of the class at Sydney Uni

Posted by The Rhetoric of Research, Stanford at 10:30 AM | Permalink | Comments (23)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

My cousin is very lucky; he is 21 years old and currently finishing a sentence of 5 years at a state prison. As this in itself is not the most conventional depiction we make of luck, we should consider why indeed he is fortunate. Born into a rather poor, gang populated neighborhood located in the heart of Los Angeles, he was drawn to this gangster lifestyle after he became a relative academic failure and lacked family support—he was an only child raised by a mother who worked more than the standard 9-to-5. Participating in crime, associating with drugs, engaging in illegal ways of making money, he was quick to form relationships with correctional facilities starting at age 16. Being in and out of jail for several years, however, he developed a unique interpretation about a very compelling issue facing the Los Angeles area.
And it was through mentioning this brief summary of his gang involvement—along with many of the stereotypes we hear from the media as well as contemporary society—that sparked our conversation over the phone. He was restricted to only 10 minutes, but this short interview was critical to bringing a primary resource to my research topic that focuses on gang culture, and more specifically highlights how it is only through a shift in paradigms that we may understand the struggles of this subculture in order to progress in the fight against it. To do this, I plan to emphasize the incentives for joining a gang, the violence that affects many, what we may be able to do to hinder its advancement, and I might even narrow my scope from gangs in L.A. to Latino/Hispanic gangs in L.A. Considering that my cousin is indeed Hispanic, one thing he said that stood out to me was that a main belief of “my crew was you either kill, or let yourself be killed. They didn’t care what color I was and I didn’t care what color they were, I knew they would shoot me just as fast as I would shoot them.” Thus, surprisingly, he at times prefers to be “locked up because at least I don’t have to worry about being killed everyday on the streets. Yea we still fight in here like everyday but there are no real guns so it’s not as bad,” he states. This comment was interesting to me, as I did not normally think of prison as a safe haven, and this is why I found this interview particularly useful—it gave me a unique unexpected sense of knowledge that I can now integrate into my final project.

Posted by at 05:20 PM | Permalink | Comments (19)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

My research subject focuses on Stanford baseball players and how they fare during professional baseball and after their baseball days end. My research will focus more on interviews than actual academic resources. The reason for this includes the amount of contacts I have in both Stanford and professional baseball. Secondly, there are not many books written or research done on such a specific subject. I will use articles and statistics for general case facts but a majority of my argument lays in the experiences others and myself. In this blog, I will focus on one interview in particular.

Chris O’Riordan was a former Stanford baseball player who graduated in 2002. He was drafted by the Texas Rangers in the 8th round of the 02’ draft and received a signing bonus of $70,000. After spending 5 years in the minor leagues, an injury to his knee forced him to retire. Many baseball players have few career choices once their baseball careers end. The fact they only have a high school education is a major reason for this lack of choices. As a Stanford graduate, Chris was able to secure a job fairly quickly. After taking a month off to rehab his knee, he sent his resume out and a short time after he had found a job at Grant Thorton, a tax advisory service for large companies. The information he provides is specific to how Stanford baseball players deal with the end of their baseball career and the start of the rest of their lives.
As of now he is applying to Stanford, Cal and USC business schools for the fall of 2009 and we all hope he doesn’t go to Cal… or SC.

Posted by at 09:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

Perhaps one of the most well-kept secrets from the mainstream western world is the daily, yes DAILY, plight of Christians in China. Since Mao Zedong instituted the People's Republic of China in 1948, the nation has adhered to an atheistic religious policy. As a result, those who profess any type of faith, Christian or not, have been subject to harsh treatment and heinous torture. Such an aggressive response is taken by the government because they view any form of faith as a threat, possibly galvanizing individuals under a creed different from the one promoted by the government.

My research paper will delve into the topic of Christian persecution in China, highlighting the intense experiences many go through because of their faith and conviction. For a while, I wasn't able to develop any type of convincing thesis in regards to the topic. Furthermore, much of the direction I had taken was pathos-driven in that I was searching for captivating tales or eye-opening first-hand accounts. However, a web article from The Economist, (www.economist.com) put an abrupt change to all that and led me in the direction of a possible thesis.
The article, titled "Sons of Heaven, Inside China's fastest growing non-governmental organization" cites how Christianity is actually growing in China and examines how the atheistic regime of China has actually PROLIFERATED the gospel throughout China due to its stringent laws. The web article provides statistics from organizations like the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life (which is an American think tank) and the China Aid Association (CAA). It also has the primary source of Zhao Xiao, a former Communist party leader who has now given his life to Christ.
The web article from The Economist provides the balance that I was aiming to achieve as I was researching a touchy topic. It has both statistics and objective data (like the fact that the CAA confirms there are 130 million Christians in China, which is perhaps more than the communist party in China), but incorporates that information well with the first-hand accounts of Zhao Xiao, as well as other Christians. The article serves as a type of template with which I should approach my paper. As opposed to relying so much on pathos-driven media and information, objective data and statistics may paint a clearer picture of the issue. However, in spite of the benefits available from this source, the one area in which this article made a difference was in regards to my thesis. I started research with only a topic in my mind, but after looking at this article and viewing its data, one possible thesis I am strongly considering is that Christianity in China will CONTINUE to grow, in spite of the high cost that many believers have had to pay and the obvious deterrents to which the government resorts. The fact that there could be more Christians than Communists in a socially communist nation is intriguing and helps me narrow my research. For instance I could discuss the reasons more and more Chinese are willing to risk all they have for a bold faith in Christ. The argument that Christianity will continue to grow is more like a thesis-in-progress and may not be the one with which I end up directing my research but it definitely focuses my efforts.

Posted by at 12:55 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

It goes without saying that the digital age is in full effect right now. Everything important, or so it seems, either is dominated by or comprised of digital/electronic counterparts. For example, college students have the option to submit their applications online or by mail. Voters can use touch screens or punch ballots, and the list continues. However, when talking about fantasy football, a game designed by Wilfred Winkenbach in 1962 with no digital aspect whatsoever, any subtle changes to the game are worth noting, especially when it is transformed into an online phenomenon. One of the most interesting section of information I have discovered thus far comes from Gerhard Falk's "Football and American Identity". Although fantasy football itself does not dominate the book (actual American Football does), Falk does a great job of linking his ideas on fantasy football to his larger message. As I perused the text looking for helpful information, something caught my eye. Falk, in describing how fantasy football went from an annoying "fill in and mail your picks" nuisance to a phenomenon online, also mentions that certain schools in Sacramento are trying to force fantasy football into their curriculums. Their reasoning, he explains, is that it could serve as motivation, especially when paired with mathematics courses.
Not only was this a complete surprise, but it also did not seem like the most beneficial idea, especially with respect to practical student learning. Nonetheless, for the scope of this research paper, it serves as fodder. Considering the central argument (of both my paper and this class) on identity formation via digital media, the fusion of school and digital fantasy football (at least the mere thought of it) is extremely relevant. Consider a classroom environment where students are actively utilizing the system of fantasy football (scores, strategies, forecasts) in math classes to help themselves along. It goes without saying that the power of fantasy football lies within its ability to transform a once boring math class into something that students might get excited about. So maybe attendance in certain classes might increase. However, my initial stance still applies. Higher level math classes, successful ones at least, simply do not have room for supplemental classroom activities.

Posted by at 11:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

My name is Katie Gera and I’m writing this post as part of a class titled “The Web 2.0: The Rhetoric of Online Activism.” The subject of this blog post will be the way Republican presidential candidate John McCain attempts to establish his credibility on his official website.

The strategies that struck me the most were the “Joe the Plumber” advertisements and the photographs taken with military wives and families on the campaign trail. Using these visuals, McCain seems to be attempting to create two distinct images of himself: the “average Joe,” or ordinary citizen to whom Americans relate on the one hand, and the Navy war hero whom they can admire on the other. Throughout the website, there are numerous references to McCain’s career in the military, many of which focus on his time spent as a POW. These reinforcements of the candidate as a heroic and respectable military man create a sharp contrast against the McCain/Palin campaign’s most recent surge of “Joe Six-Pack” and “Joe the Plumber” themed advertisements. While I understand the need to represent a presidential candidate as a multifaceted individual, I think the newly adopted tactic of “average Joe” commercials indicates that the McCain campaign has become increasingly aware of their failure to perform well in the polls and is now trying desperately to frame John McCain in a new and positive light. In my view, seesawing with his image in this manner has actually decreased both the candidate’s and the campaign’s credibility.

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 06:19 PM | Permalink | Comments (5)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between University of Sydney and Stanford University. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

This satirical message about lemon and lion faces has been removed. We applaud the creativity and humor of the two Sydney University students who posted the message and hope that they will henceforth publicise their important research in another forum.

Posted by Rebecca Johinke, University of Sydney at 05:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between University of Sydney and Stanford University. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

At a world class research university like Stanford, the diversity of academic pursuits is overwhelming. Every day on campus there are countless events and speakers representing the entire academic spectrum. Our PWR2 oral communications class mimics this campus-wide diversity but on a smaller scale. Here are some of the projects we are working on this quarter analyzing rhetoric in a variety of settings.

Tobacco Industry advertising is infamous for its deceptive rhetoric. So when tobacco companies started producing anti-smoking advertisements for teens, we had the right to be suspicious. Lolliard Tobacco's "Tobacco is whacko if you're a teen" program has been accused of actually making teens want to smoke. Here's one of their TV ads (link). And here's a print ad:

Now, adults don't really know what the latest teen slang words are, but whacko isn't one of them. A teen will immediately flag the slogan as dorky and lame, and the already weak anti-smoking message will fall on deaf ears.

My research topic is an overview of the rhetorical situation in lower-level software development. Although engineering seems like something entirely analytical and scientific, it has an uglier side to it if you dig deep enough. There exist schisms between users of different languages, frameworks, and even text editors, and this often distracts developers from the real issues at hand. My research in this area is greatly aided by the rapid communication of technical communities over the internet which, as primary sources, I can use to put forward a strong argument

Most consumers of drug products do not question the safety and efficacy of a drug that has been approved by the US Federal Drug Administration (FDA) and is being marketed by a credible pharmaceutical company. My research explores the rhetoric employed by the pharmaceutical industry in its communication with the FDA, scholars in medicine and health policy and consumers to persuade them of the safety and health benefits of their particular product. My project aims to identify the weaknesses in the regulation of pharmaceutical companies and to propose solutions that will ensure that the health of consumers is not put at risk.

Posted by The Rhetoric of Research, Stanford at 04:40 PM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between University of Sydney and Stanford University. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

By The Rocketeer

We walked into our PWR2 class this fine Monday afternoon to find the whiteboards littered with comments written on students’ papers in peer review. They ranged from “okay” to “weak” to “oh for f---’s sake,” spanning perhaps the gambit of human emotion that can be expressed about Research Based Arguments.

Our group is divided on the effectiveness of peer review in a classroom setting. We all agree that in theory it can be rewarding, but some of us feel that in practice, social norms prevent us from expressing our true feelings. It’s in no one’s best interest to hold back constructive criticism, yet somehow the cat of culture has got our tongue.

Peer review represents a very narrow forum--it’s one person conversing with another person about one project. In real life, however, hundreds upon thousands of people may read a single document. Being politically correct has become a nationwide concern, and in our environment of Stanford University, the student body is quite conscious of what can and should be said in a public setting.

More on this PLUS a video, after the break.

Three perspectives on controlled speech.

Chris Anderson
Last year, I had to (or I should say, had the privilege to) write a paper in my PWR1 class much like the one we're writing this year. I thought it was pretty good, but, of course, we had to submit it numerous times to peer review. In my class, there was only one person that I wouldn't have wanted to have read my paper - so, of course, I got her every time. Have any of you ever watched the movie Borat? It's essentially making fun of American prejudices of foreigners and other social groups. Her paper, of course, argued the opposite, to meager effect. I was torn - how do I say that her entire line of argument is wrong and patently unsupportable? Faced with this situation, over and over, I proved my cowardice. I merely chose to tell her that some of her sources were not credible, and to talk to the teacher.

Is that unforgivable?

Alison Bloch
Hi y'all, my name is Alison and as you may guess from my salutation, I'm from Texas - don’t worry though, all Texans aren’t crazy horse-riders. My PWR2 research paper analyzes rape, in particular how society's excessive focus on the victim perpetuates the existence of rape. Clearly, my topic isn't exactly light-hearted. So, while writing I've striven to make my paper approachable to any reader. Perhaps the reader was a rape victim herself, or maybe he staunchly disagrees with the bulk of my argument. Because I’m worried I might offend someone who the issue has personally impacted or disregard someone who already holds strong opinions against my claims, the importance of being political correct affects the way I write and what I write. Since I chose an intense and provocative subject, the need for political correctness is particularly salient, but I feel most of us have experienced a situation, formal or informal, where we must manipulate what we want to say so that anyone can appreciate our argument.

Siyeona Chang
I had to adjust to many things when I came to Stanford, but the hardest thing to get used to was being politically correct. I was used to living in communities that are relatively homogeneous and had, until then, found myself in few occasions where I had to be cautious about what I said or wrote. I’m inclined to think that perhaps it is this very inconvenience that got me involved in minority issues in which my personal interests do not come into play. Of course this does not automatically exempt me from the heavy duty of maintaining political correctness, but it does allow me to step back and gain the objectivity necessary to find my scholarly ethos. I gain the advantage of being familiar enough with the issue to be able to make a constructive argument, but not emotionally involved with the parties involved so that I can be fair in my judgment.

I’m working on a paper that explores the values that the Islamic headscarf stands for, and what the French government’s decision to ban its use in public schools (March 15, 2004) reflects about the societal sentiments towards the Muslim minority in Western Europe. The hijab has been viewed as a symbol of oppression by Westerners, and this is an understanding that is not applicable to explaining the revival of conservative religious practices among Muslim minorities in the recent years. One of the challenges of my research is identifying and prioritizing competing factors that are largely qualitative. My research is still underway and I’ll keep you guys updated about the progress. In the meanwhile, if anyone has any insightful comments that could be of help to my paper (perhaps taken from the Australian approach to Multiculturalism), feel free to get in touch with me!

---

Also the promised video:

Posted by The Rhetoric of Research, Stanford at 04:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between University of Sydney and Stanford University. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

˙uʍop-ǝpısdn sɯǝǝs ƃuıɥʇʎɹǝʌǝ puɐ ʎdool ǝlʇʇıl ɐ ǝɹɐ ǝʍ :uoısɹǝʌuı ǝɥʇ uopɹɐd ˙ʎʇısɹǝʌıun pɹoɟuɐʇs ɯoɹɟ ɐılɐɹʇsnɐ uı spuǝıɹɟ ɹno oʇ ollǝɥ

Hello,

The three of us are very excited to meet you. Unfortunately, we’re sleepy. You probably are too. Actually, because of time zones, you may be sleeping right now. If that is the case, we’re jealous. We believe that this may be having a detrimental effect on our powers of creativity and cognition. Furthermore, while we know that we are supposed to introduce ourselves as well as discussion topics based on our research experience, we’re still at a bit of a loss as to exactly what to write. We’ll attempt some individual introductions, we guess.

---

My name is Jocelyne and I’m from Montana, a very sparsely populated state along the Canadian border in the Rocky Mountains. Despite my origins at the northernmost edge of the US, I have spent most of my life obsessed with occurrences far to the South. I am an International Relations major with a focus on Latin America. So far, I have visited or lived in Mexico, Costa Rica, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and Bolivia, and I will be spending most of this school year in Santiago, Chile. For my research in this class, I am trying to measure the success of the Guatemalan Commission for Historical Clarification, specifically with respect to its goal to end the silence of Mayan populations. In addition to lack of sleep, I’m currently struggling with how to quantify a subject that is essentially qualitative, and with coming up with an original paper without access to any original information or primary sources. Finally, this is a class on rhetoric, and at present, I have not successfully incorporated any rhetorical analysis into my essay. Can’t wait to speak with you!

---

Hey, my name is Arthur and I am a senior majoring in Biological Sciences. I lived in South Korea for 15 years. I went to high school in Kentucky, which is located in Midwest of the United States. My research project in this class is on rhetorical situations in physician-patient interactions. To search for any information regarding the relationship between physicians and patients, I often went back and forth between Korean websites and American search engines/Google. Problems with the information I found from Korean websites include: 1. having to translate the information into English, and 2. citing information isn't as popular as U.S so I could not exactly use the information freely. For some reason, it is easier for me to access information in Korean websites, probably because there are less subscription issues and plagiarism isn't considered as serious in South Korea. So using Korean websites for me helped develop ideas initially, but when I actually needed to use the information in my paper, I would look at the sources in English.

---

Hi, I am Elizabeth. I am nineteen years old and from the state of Ohio. Ohioans – at least Ohioans from my particular region – are supposed to carry no accent. Although, the students here at Stanford seem to think I have a broad pronunciation of the letter “a.” I suppose it is true.

Anyhow. I am in the first quarter of my second year of university, and I am struggling to decide what to study. My goal for the moment is to pursue a double major in Biology and English. But then I have switched my mind approximately thirty-two times already, so who is to say how things will go?

An 8-10-page paper was due in this class (the Rhetoric of Research) today. I procrastinated in choosing a topic and so stayed up most of the night (or rather, most of the morning) writing my report. Hence the sleep-deprivation comment at the introduction of our post.

I originally meant to study sustainability habits in student life. Then I spoke in class about the “martial metaphor” that pervades medical lingo (e.g., “the war on disease,” “fight illness"). For the next presentation I explored the romanticized conception of genius, and how this picture fails to fit with a society that is increasingly collaborative. Now, however, I am interested in researching the political rhetoric that has permeated the Endangered Species Act and obscured its aims. I am contending that under the current presidential administration, the environmental act has managed to move backwards, promoting political motivations at the expense of wildlife conservation. It is particularly alarming that these deviations come at a time when attention to climate change is so imperative. We can see signs of imperiled species at a very local level – here at the Stanford campus, there is a special type of salamander, the California tiger salamander, that faces a threat to survival. I am trying, but without much success, to find out how we, as students, can make worthwhile change on this issue.

This is very long and exhausting! So I will end here. But I truly look forward to meeting and talking with you all!

Peace, from
Elizabeth

Posted by The Rhetoric of Research, Stanford at 04:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (8)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

McCain made a choice to choose a woman as his vice president, who may become one of the first female vice president in USA history. There are many reasons behind Mccain’s choice of Palin. McCains opposition had an interesting choice of candidates including an African American and a woman and in order to stand out he was in need of someone who could fill this gap in his campaign and Palin seemed to be the right choice. She would be bringing a relatively 'youthful' and energetic aspect to his office as she is 44 and he is over 70, this incorporation would add refreshment to the office. He is also trying to get the votes of American women who had voted for Hillary. By chossing Palin he wants to prove that he believes in women and their equal capabilities like men. He is not just targeting women through this emancipated view. He is also targeting men by including a female factor. She seems elegant, represent able and could be considered the perfect example of a women pursuing her career and maintaining a successful private life. His choice is believed to be based on many more factors that he believes will be of interest to the American population. Palin being a young, conservative, ordinary woman of five children with a huge success in her career seemed to be a right choice as it created a statement about the American culture. Her many economic and political accomplishments and being the governor of Alaska make her qualified for taking on such a position. But still the question remains... is Sarah Palin the right choice? There is a lot of controversy behind her. Part of the American population still does not totally accept the idea of choosing a female leader. With all this in mind, McCain took a decision to have her as his vice president without realize the controversy that could come from bind her. One example is her 16 year old daughter who is pregnant now, before being married; in this case an abortion wouldn’t be an option as it’s against republican views…could this cause a problem for the campaign. So the question is did McCain really make a good decision when he chose Sarah Palin to be his vice president?

Posted by American University in Cairo at 02:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (12)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

Different strategies are used by the different candidates in order to attract their audiences. John Mccane uses a strategy that could seem some what unethical to the Arab world and that is; “attacking the competition instead of focusing on ones own strengths.” In the front page of his website, Mccaine states that Obama’s past should be of concern to many American’s as it is unclear. He also tries to make it clear that Obama is actually running against the current president and not Mccaine himself, and that is by repeating Obama’s statement “ I’m not Goerge Bush.”

This defense mechanism by Mccain only shows weakness and that he’s afraid that what he is fighting for is not appealing to people enough. Accordingly, he finds whatever way to steal voters from obama, by trying to show that he is a bad person instead of showing what a good person Mccain really is.In his website Mccain invites people to share any embarassing video they have about Obama.

He is also attacking Obama’s plan for taxes and for obamas general economic plan. This is pretty much expected since the candidates are in a race for better future plans. But what is not acceptable is finding away to attract obama personally instead of professionally which is what Americans are looking for.

To sum up McCains actions shows only weakness and the unavailability of good ideas to support the American Public which will in the end grant him his votes.

Rana Abdel Rehim
Meena fawzy
Mohamed selim

Posted by American University in Cairo at 06:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (15)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

Obama’s website addresses the issue of poverty in America while McCain does not. Each candidate chooses to include or omit this issue since each is targeting a different audience. McCain’s campaign targets older, well-off people, namely upper-class citizens, while Obama targets “the common man,” specifically the lower-and-middle class. McCain does not wish to appeal to Obama’s target group and thus does not address the growing issue of poverty in America. Obama’s campaign dedicates a large part of his website to this issue, which effectively reaches his target audience.
Obama starts his speech by describing a famous encounter between Bobby Kennedy and an impoverished child of the Mississippi delta. This introduction touches the audience on a personal level as well as appealing to patriotic emotions. He states a known quotation by Bobby Kennedy, “How can a country like this allow it?” These words insinuate the audacity of poverty in a country as rich and affluent as the United States. Obama does not fail to repeat these words throughout his speech which emphasizes their emotional effect. Obama mentions facts such as the increase of poverty two fold since 1980 and follows them by repeating, “How can a country like this allow it?” mounting the outrage towards the government who has not taken poverty into account. He attacks McCain’s ideologies indirectly throughout the speech by offering quotes that were said by Dr. King, “Hope is not found in any single ideology – an insistence on doing the same thing with the same result year after year.” These words reinforce appeal to the American patriotism of the middle-class.
As students in a third world country it is interesting to us to consider poverty as a serious issue in the richest country of the world.

By: Silke Martin , Kanzy Kandil, Ihab Awwad

Posted by American University in Cairo at 06:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

Soliman Mohsen
Lance Ataalla
Bourhan Rateb

On November 4, the American citizens will face a life changing decision. They will be confronted with a choice that will involve not only the American nation but the entire planet. Therefore, us Arabs are anxious and concerned to whom the power will be granted.
Looking at McCain's website what captivated our attention was his slogan: "Country first". It seems to us that he is willing to protect his country by any means necessary as commander and chief of his nation, even if it takes drastic measures. No matter what his claims are about how much we wants peace, we cannot ignore the fact that he is a supporter of Bushes policies concerning the war in Iraq. Bearing in mind that he was a soldier who refused to leave the battlefield even after an injury that could have taken his life. A man who volunteered to stay an fight instead of going back home could at any time engage an irrational decision and provoke a war at any time.
On the other hand Obama's campaign appealed ton the middle eastern crowd, looking at his slogan:" In change we believe"; for the past eight years middle eastern were faced to a "bush regime". We are ready to face a new era, a time of change and hopefully he will give hope to all.

Posted by American University in Cairo at 06:41 AM | Permalink | Comments (13) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

We are handling Barack Obama’s website in general, with regards to color, choice of words, and even layout. The choice of colors and words on his website demonstrate openness to a new life and hope for a new and refined united states. The color blue calms the reader, and since it is part of the American flag, helps give citizens a sense of belonging, and his public-friendly language helps him be close to the public. Obama’s slogan emphasizes his faith in the American public, and his belief in positive change that could be brought about by anyone. Due to his hopeful vision for the future and his concern for both the major and the minor problems of the public, people have a tendency to look up to him and to feel connected with him. We believe his site is very organized, as he has tabs for every concern for the American public or with regards to his campaign, and this brings us to another point. In his “People” tab, he mentions each and every category in the US population – from ethnicities to professions to gender – which gives those people the sense of being important and an integral part of the community. Not only is he concerned about Americans inside the country, but also cares about the welfare of Americans abroad. However, when it comes to religious groups, he does not directly mention Muslims or other minorities, while mentioning Jewish Americans (which we believe is because of their influence on the economy) separately. In fact, he does not even mention the Middle East as a whole. From our Middle Eastern point of view, this makes us feel that we are not part of the discourse even though the United States is majorly involved in the Middle East.

Yomna Osman
Nahla Shalaby
Yomna Arbad

Posted by American University in Cairo at 06:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

On the home page of John McCain's website, there is couple of videos that argues that John McCain is ready to lead the nation and shows his experience in public affairs. That's why the American audience should vote for him, because he always puts his "Country First."

One of the videos starts with McCain informing his plan very clearly to the American audience. He states that his plan is to "Rebuild your savings, grow your investments, and energy independence". He is focusing mainly on developing the American economy and having an independent energy economy after all the crisis it went through the last 8 years of Bush administration especially that there was a huge amount of money spent on wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which lately ended with the Wall Street Crisis. He is giving the audience faith that he will save their economy if they vote for him. He is promising to lower the taxes and create a renewable energy economy, which will create more job opportunities to the Americans.

McCain argues that Washington is spending billions everyday to the Middle East because they want to spread out the wealth. He does not sound to like the idea of spreading the wealth; instead he wants to use it to reform his own economy. He is also making it sound as if Washington is doing the Middle East a favor when in reality the main reason for the presence of the US in the Middle East is securing their oil interests in the region.

By: Abdallah Elsayed and Rana El-Tazy

Posted by American University in Cairo at 06:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (11) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

The American elections are an important issue for the whole world, because its results have a great impact on the world’s politics and economy. As we were watching obama and McCain’s website we were interested by a video called 90 percent; the video basically sends a message to the people that if the Americans elect McCain they will be changing George bush by another president who might be a different person but believes in the ideology of his successor. The video starts by saying that McCain voted with the president 90 percent of the time, tax breaks for big corporations and the wealthy, nothing for the middle class, spend $10billlion a month in Iraq( while the American economy suffers), and the video is concluded by john McCain admitting that he voted with the president 90 percent of the time. We believe that this was a clever move from obama because he is telling the American people that if they elect McCain they will be refusing the change that obama is offering for both the United States and the world. The world is not eager to have another George bush; we are all waiting for change. Obama on the other hand represent change and progress and he promises to reform America and turn it into a better one; he also wants people to believe in him and in themselves. Obama is an African American who will bring change to Washington and will be a great president who can make America a better place.

tarek abdel hamid, omar el garawany, ziad badr

Video link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PluoMotgl2w

Posted by American University in Cairo at 05:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

We’re posting to evaluate each candidates websites.

Obama’s website directly directs you to his homepage while McCain’s website first starts with a video that gives us the reasons why we should elect him as voters and how he would improve the economy. Proceeding with another video of his experience and injury in the military, he is trying to prove to us that he is a patriotic and faithful man who can lead the country. He also emphasizes why the united states needs such a man like him having courage and especially faith which is well stressed on.
There is a clickable button that then leads to the homepage similar to Obama’s homepage. Similar tabs that are available are issues, blogs, media, news, etc. The other major similarity that we’d like to stress upon is the color both candidates chose as their background which is blue. When we looked up the blue color psychology we got some interesting results. Blue gives the viewers a sense of calmness, serenity, cleanliness and peacefulness. Moreover, blue is the favorite color of most people according to polls. The American flag also consists mostly of blue because it symbolizes vigilance, perseverance and justice. Assumingly both want to show that they are patriotic and loyal to the American people.
When comparing the ads we found out that McCain has more negative ads than Obama. In McCain’s homepage we found an ad that attacked Obama’s background. Usually when people feel that they’re week they start attacking. This is actually the case because Obama is winning in the polls so far.
We covered and analyzed at least the important aspects of the page layout.

Ahmed Mostafa, Christianne Chackal and Sandra Ahmed

Posted by American University in Cairo at 05:15 AM | Permalink | Comments (8) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

Why should Obama be considered about women that much? That question has been raised in our minds several times. Finally, throughout the information we obtained while surfing Obama’s website “http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/womenissues”; we discovered that he is trying to attract those who were strongly supporting Hilary Clinton; so maybe this is why women’s issues figure a lot on his website.
Actually, Obama is addressing the issues that women experience in America, healthcare issues is one of the problems. American women don’t have the same health care insurances like men, so Obama guarantee them with having the same health care men get, with electronic medical records, and reporting systems to assure that his patients get perfect treatments with low costs. Moreover, he will increase the ovarian cancer awareness for women, because so many are infected with it and have no clue how to diagnose it. Because the HIV virus killed so many women, Obama introduced Microbicide development Act, to protect them from its transitions. In addition to the healthcare issue, Obama will prevent any domestic violent act against women and restricted some laws for that because 1,400 women in the United States die every day as a result of harassments, rapes, and stalks.
Last but not least, Obama closed the wage gap between men and women in US because women will be taught math, science as men; hence, men and women will be equally paid for their equal work. Furthermore, Obama will give women seven days paid off checks, if they did not come to their work for their children sicknesses. Not just that, but Obama will encourage women to open their own businesses which they were denied to open many years ago.

Posted by American University in Cairo at 05:11 AM | Permalink | Comments (15) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

The colors are taken from the American flag, but with more lightening effects which could reflect the meaning of better and brighter future as it is shown. Also, colors are going smoothly together, especially in the curves and the "O" shape. Obviously, the shape of “O” is very clear standing for Obama. The blue shape which is in the top of the logo, gives the feeling of the sunrise over a field as an example. The idea of the sun is deeply supported by the lights over the logo and the brighter degrees of the blue and red colors. The blue upper edge also could give the shape of a rainbow. Also, the circle shape easily gives the development process effect “the circle of change”.
What is really great in the shapes of the logo is the flexibility of its design. Every time you open any link from category people you will find a modified logo goes with the category. This indicates that Obama really trying to reach the whole American society with all sectors, professions and categories. As well, the red shapes which represent the American flag, is used perfectly in the names of every state.
It is clear that the logo is so connected to the democrats’ logo. Not only the colors but the also the curvy shapes. As historically known, the democratic party of the US is liberal, so they seek changing old traditions and work towards more liberality. Obama’s logo is more symbolic and artistic comparing with mcCain’s logo. Also, Obama’s logo seems to be more peaceful, but mcCains’ gets the feel of military view especially with the star inside his name.

If you want to check Obama's distinctive logos and the whole ideas visit this links:
http://www.underconsideration.com/speakup/archives/004262.html

Islam elbialy, Menattalah elbatran , Rana el shamy

Posted by American University in Cairo at 04:53 AM | Permalink | Comments (17) | TrackBacks (0)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

There is much information asymmetry in our world; people have varying access to information depending on their geographical locations, social status, wealth, and power. Is there a link between information and "social well-being" -- social mobility, wealth, power, and so on? This is a very general question which I hope to answer with my research project. To facilitate my research and argument process, I define a new subculture of people: the information connoisseurs.

Who are these information connoisseurs, and what is their role in the context of increasing or reducing information asymmetry? Are they simply hypothetical mental constructs or do they actually play significant roles in reality?

Note: This entry has been updated as of October 22, 2008, 1930h (Pacific Time, GMT -8)

In short, information connoisseurs are people who have great access to information, in their relative social and cultural contexts. As shown in the diagram above, they are well poised on one side of the line of information asymmetry, as opposed to those suffering from a poverty of information on the other extreme side of the line of information asymmetry.

From my trips to the Green and Jackson Business libraries, I have discovered numerous excellent books. One of them is The Social Life of Information, by Brown and Duguid. Beneath its innocent-looking plain blue cover, I discovered a wonderful treasure trove of information over its dog-eared pages. Brown and Duguid assert that many of us now "exult in the simple volume of information that technology now makes available", constantly cheering "the disaggregation of knowledge into data", overemphasizing the actual value of words such as "quadrillion", "terabyte" and "megaflop". Essentially, Brown and Duguid frown upon the treatment of information as merely information -- they attempt to persuade the reader that information also has a social life. They claim that:

...some of the people driving us all hard into the future on the back of new technologies appear to assume that if we all focus hard enough on information, then we will get where we want to go most directly. This central focus inevitably pushes aside all the fuzzy stuff that lies around the edges – context, background, history, common knowledge, social resources. But this stuff around the edges is not as irrelevant as it may seem. It provides valuable balance and perspective. It holds alternatives, offers breadth of vision, and indicates choices.

Extending from this notion of the social life of information, I postulate that in the provision of information to rural areas (e.g. in Africa) to alleviate poverty, it is not actually the information itself that is useful, but rather the social context which surrounds the information. It is the social infrastructure that supports the provision of information that is useful, that drives any possible economic growth, that carries with it the surprising potential to drive Africa and other rural regions out of their poverty. In other words, information in all its abstractness and complexity, ceases to be a meaningful entity in isolation from its social fringe.

-- update below --

I'd like to say thank you to both Bec and Steph from the University of Sydney for commenting on my entry. Steph, I completely agree with you that when I devised my research project (and wrote this blog entry), I was also inevitably seeing things from an information connoisseur's perspective. Indeed, those who may have less access to traditional (or perhaps 'conventional' would be a better word) forms of information may have access to other types of information. At this point in time I feel compelled to highlight that my mention of Africa as a rural area was rather generalized -- there are many other places in the world which are similarly rural and underdeveloped (I hesitate to label them as 'undeveloped').

In any case, even those perceived by information connoisseurs as having the condition of 'information poverty' may not actually be suffering from information poverty; notably, each such group and individual would almost certainly have better access to localized information -- information which may ultimately prove to be much more critical and essential as compared to 'general information' (i.e. whatever that can be found on the internet).

In this aspect, this 'information asymmetry' which we speak about may not actually be a one-sided asymmetry: there may be no clear dichotomy between those with more information and those with less information. This asymmetry may instead be more accurately perceived and understood as a kind of uneven multidimensional "information map", in which different people and different groups of people have different levels of information. Speaking in cultural terms, borrowing the words of Adams and Smith in Electronic Tribes (an illuminating collection of articles on digital culture), information distribution both globally and locally may be better represented as heterarchies (webs and networks) instead of hierarchies (strict vertical subsets).

Adams and Smith further comment that:

"Tribe members are empowered within the tribe, through collective responses and through projecting identities into the tribal network. Tribalism may reduce hierarchy and inequality. Tribes have fluid boundaries externally [...] Tribes are not amenable to centralized control and persuasion. Tribes may not have historical reality beyond being a conceptual and political artifact of [...]"

If we can view this "information domain" using the lens of culture, we may also be able to further extend the notion of culture and subculture to it as well. I shall certainly consider this possibility. In addition, I shall definitely continue my project with the understanding that even those who are, in the Western sense, considered 'stricken' with information poverty may have localized (and other forms of) information which may be useful to them. A related question is whether this information may also be able to propel them into societal 'well-being' (again, a very Western understanding of wealth, power and a 'high' standard of living). I may explore this tangent if I find it central to my primary research questions!

Posted by at 12:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (6) | TrackBacks (0)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

When I joined the CCR PWR2 this Fall, I was incredibly excited--I would finally get the opportunity to write, research, and speak about Soompi, the online forum that changed my life.

This is not to say that my other two research topic choices, Korean Hip Hop and Japanese Rock Culture were just for show; I simply would have found a way to include Soompi as a significant part of those research arguments as well ;)

I have possibly learned more about cross-cultural exchange and my own role in it from Soompi than from any "real world" source. But it feels almost strange to refer to the "real world" and "online world" as separate, because my personal life has blended the two so seamlessly. I am not ashamed to say that I have spent countless hours and made over 1,000 posts on Soompi, or that my relationships with people in IRC chatrooms across the globe are as trusting and satisfying as "real" relationships. In this way, I feel like I have something special to contribute to the discussion of the Cultural Interfaces theme--I have lived the online life that as a CCR class, we are "studying" and even poking fun at from our outside perspective...a strange feeling, indeed!

At first, I was severely challenged with the problem of making Soompi, a forum that my class knows nothing about, into something globally significant. I began serious brainstorming after my first conference with Christine, in the back of a van headed to my hometown, Los Angeles. I had discovered a few great sources already, such as Amy Jo Kim's Community Building on the Web, a how-to guide for creating your own successful online forum, and statistical publications like the Pew American Life Project: Asian Americans: The Young and Connected. When I arrived at home and began to discuss my topic with the people around me, they became instrumental in putting Soompi into a larger context--even if they knew nothing about it. My Dad, with a strong background in Computer Science and Networking, revealed his own excitement about high-speed Internet's future implications for understanding and problem-solving on an international scale. My mother, with her background in psychology and education, helped me to understand how Soompi functions as a nurturing community that molds the cultural development of its users. A weekend trip home turned out to be exactly the push I needed to map out a plan and get started.

When I arrived back at Stanford, I was more motivated than ever to make this research MEAN something, on both a personal and societal level. I spent almost entire days at Green Library, because the books I needed don't circulate! T_T Often, these books were comprised of a series of articles about Cyberculture that went in circles referencing and summarizing one another (and always ultimately ending at renowned scholar Howard Rheingold, who published in the early 1990's). What I found in these books was not an answer, but a new question--Why should online groups be given the title of "community" or "subculture" in today's world? I had just been using these terms to describe Soompi without giving it much thought; it was *obvious* to me that Soompi functions as community, subculture, and tribe because I have been such an involved and observant member. But apparently, this debate has been holding back discussions of how online groups might transform our traditional definitions of these terms; it will be a new challenge for me to weave this debate into my research argument.

I hope that any of my classmates or instructors that read this blog post now has a better and more complete understanding of my reasons for choosing this topic, and how personally important it is for me to add my own research to the global discussion of digital media and culture. Wish me luck! ^____^

-Stephanie

Posted by at 12:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (0)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

My project deals with exploring the realm of personal blogs. I am hoping to find people’s reasoning for posting diaries online for faceless strangers to read, as well as the allure of reading these posts.
I decided that the best way to research this topic is to explore multiple personal blogs, instead of focusing on academic research. With this method of research, I have created my own classifications of personal blogs, identifying the intended purpose of the blog through the writer’s rhetoric and recurring themes. For example, I have found that some personal diary blogs seem to act as a kind of therapy for the writer. Why they post it online instead of saving files to their computer or writing in a more traditional diary I have not yet determined. Perhaps the reasoning is simply the influence of technology. On the other hand there are personal diary blogs that seem to be seeking attention. The recurring pathos in these blogs is the first sign, along with encouragement for feedback and continued attempts at wit and humor. Other types of personal blogs include philosophical reflection, and what I classify as a “play-by-play” blog: a person who updates their blog constantly with minute details of their day, to the point where the postings seem obsessive compulsive.
I am planning on tracking 5 blogs within in each of my classifications. I will then be able to compare similar blogs with each other, as well as cross-analyze the blogs for differences in themes, rhetoric, and purpose. Ultimately I hope to be able to comment on the rationality surrounding personal diary blogs, and identify the motives behind the different categories of these bloggers.
The best part of this project is the entertainment. Each day I follow along with a stranger’s life, and quite often their life is silly, preposterous, ridiculous, or just fun to follow. Here are a few examples:

“The Gay Banker”- A homosexual investment banker in London, detailing the drama of his love life. http://gaybanker.blogspot.com/

“Tumadora”- A borderline play-by-play blogger, whose posts have no real value other than that she seems to enjoy rambling about senseless occurrences in her life. http://tumadora.info/?cat=3

Posted by at 12:23 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

My research focuses on the role that PC bangs have played in Korean culture. PC bang is the Korean term for PC room. These numerous establishments are a hybrid between Internet Café and videogame arcade. Since their introduction in 1998, PC bangs have become the hub of Korean online gaming. Offering popular titles such as Starcraft, WarCraft and Diablo II, PC bangs have become an important part of leisure for youth in South Korea. The social aspects of PC bangs have been thoroughly analyzed. The economic impacts that PC bangs has had, however, has long been overlooked. In an article from the Journal of Education, Community, and Values, Byungho Park and Thom Gillespie of Indiana University present PC bangs as a business that has deep ties with the gaming industry in Korea.
Park and Gillespie first relate the rise of the PC bang to the expansion of the online gaming industry. Piracy had been a huge problem in South Korea and the lack of copyright laws discouraged software companies to establish businesses in the country. PC bangs provided these gaming software developers with a market. Because PC bangs were legal businesses, they could not use pirated material and thus were forced to purchase games for their computers. The success of Starcraft in South Korea helped to cement the profitability of PC bangs, as well as that of the software market in Korea. According to Park and Gillespie, “Just after one year since its introduction, PC-bangs became the center of the Korean software market, an inevitable change considering the PC-bangs purchase six million dollars worth of game software every month.” Once it found a market, the gaming industry then began to diversify its products offered in PC bangs to include online chatting. This was aimed at the female adolescents, “who were stereotypically thought to be unfriendly with computers,” but were more interested in socializing.
In this way, the gaming industry and the PC bangs worked together to target customers from ranging demographics. This is important to my topic because this helps to explain why PC bangs have such a widespread influence on Korean culture. From the journal, it would seem as if the gaming industry played a pivotal role in promoting PC bangs, which in turn, enhanced the gaming industry.

Posted by at 08:49 PM | Permalink | Comments (6)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

I am writing this blog post as part of my PWR 2 class, The Rhetoric of Online Activism. I will be commenting on John McCain website. (JohnMcCain.com)

John McCain knows he most likely will not be able to sway any Democrats in this election, but might be able to persuade some independents to vote for him. His site seems to engage the already loyal Republican voter while being a collage of his life and adding forays into Obama’s inexperience.

Upon entering the webpage, there are videos of John McCain taking to the audience about how horrible the last four years have been trying his hardest to separate himself from Bush but not the Republican Party. He then goes to show the events of the Vietnam War and how he was not in the “hippie” movement, but in a prison camp in Vietnam for years serving his country. He uses his experiences in Vietnam to show how he puts “Country First” and himself second.

When directed to the main page we see tabs for his issues and then “Photos of the Week” showing McCain and Sarah Palin in images that make them look powerful and distinguished. He then tries to appeal to the “Joe the Plumber” person with the phrase, “Don’t Tax Me for Working Hard”. On the “Issues” page, the site uses images of different things including a fighter jet a picture of a “traditional” American family outside a house. These photos appeal to many people as being “American” and promoting the “American Dream”. McCain displays himself as “Maverick” willing to put the country first and how he crosses party lines to help America, for example the immigration reform bill alongside Democrat Ted Kennedy.

JohnMcCain.com seems to try and appeal to the values of the Republican Party while debunking Obama from everything from his Senate voting record to his inexperience. McCain poses himself as the seasoned and experienced “Maverick” while making Barack Obama seem too inexperienced to be President, and stating how he does not stand up for the American People. I think his site does a great job engaging people who are already going to vote for him but could have done a better job influencing the undecided voter.

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 06:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

We are commenting on the Obama campaign website (www.barackobama.com) for our PWR 2 class, The Rhetoric of Online Activism.

Obama’s history as a community organizer has been the target of frequent mockery from the McCain campaign, with VP candidate Sarah Palin joking that “being a small town mayor is like being a community organizer, except you have actual responsibilities.” Despite the overwhelming cheers from the Republican Convention crowd, Obama has used his experience as a grassroots organizer to further the interests of to his campaign. Using his website as his primary tool, he has established a strong base of local volunteers eager to canvass, fundraise, and hold community events to support his campaign.

As soon as visitors access his website, they are immediately confronted by a barage of images imploring them to take direct action in support of the Obama campaign. The opening page of the website asks visitors to “Join the Movement” by supplying their email address and zip code, allowing the Obama campaign to contact them (often multiple times a day), informing supporters on the daily news of the campaign, offering ways to get involved,and, of course, asking for money.

If visitors choose to skip the signup and go directly to the main page, they are immediately greeted by links and graphics telling them how they can get involved in the campaign. Perhaps the most interesting of these is a tab titled “Neighbor to Neighbor, which if clicked on links to a page where visitors are told how they can make an impact for Obama by volunteering in battleground states.

The site says,“Talking directly to voters is the most important way you can help win this election for Barack Obama.” Importantly, the emphasis is on what “you,” a campaign outsider, can do to influence the election. It stresses the importance of everyday Americans in effecting change and empowers ordinary citizens to take some ownership of the campaign. This is where Obama’s background as a community organizer clearly manifests itself in a positive way for the campaign. The strength of the Obama campaign’s volunteer network shows that his years spent as a grassroots organizer was time well-spent.

Mark Garret
Susanna Sheehan

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 04:28 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

Hello, we are three students enrolled in an oral communication class considering the role of the Internet in political activism. Our names are Samantha McGirr, Ayis Megiris, and Thomas Fu. Thomas is a registered Democrat, Samantha is an independent voter, and Ayis is independent but cannot vote due to his international status. We recently performed a rhetorical analysis of the McCain-Palin website.

With its straightforward, commonsense rhetoric and layout, the McCain site is designed to appeal to an audience of white, male, undecided voters. Upon entering the site, viewers are greeted by a videotaped McCain arguing that “The last eight years haven’t worked very well, have they?” an observation probably intended to distance himself from President Bush and thus align himself more closely with moderate views. To the right of the video are several buttons labeled with action verbs such as “Learn More” and “Recruit.” Such participatory words give viewers a sense of empowerment, making them feel more invested in the campaign.

Once the viewer enters the main web site, he is greeted by rhetoric and imagery further reinforcing McCain’s commitment to the people of everyday, middle America. The site features patriotic imagery, such as stars and stripes, as well as a blue and red color scheme. The phrase “I’m Joe the Plumber” is splayed across the top of the page in kitschy, 50’s-style lettering, establishing a connection with working-class individuals with traditional values and sensibilities. McCain’s throwback to old-time Americana makes viewers nostalgic for a simpler time, before the “last eight years” severely complicated life for average citizens.

We agree that the site effectively enhances McCain’s appeal to heartland America. Thomas, whose family is from Indiana, feels a connection to the no-nonsense rhetoric, whereas Samantha, as a female from progressive San Francisco, encountered a disconnect. Ayis, from Greece, is concerned that the rhetoric shows a lack of consideration for other demographics.

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 04:25 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

We are analyzing the use of color on the Obama campaign websites for our writing and rhetoric course, which focuses on the rhetoric of online activism.

The first-time visitor to Barack Obama’s campaign website is immediately confronted with an abundance of blue. The color varies from a deep, royal blue to the light sky-blue of Obama’s campaign logo. What does this color mean? What argument is Obama making?

On the one hand, the use of bright blue as a highlighting color might be an attempt to literally “shed light” on Obama and his campaign; the vibrant yet dignified hue fits perfectly with Obama’s message of hope and change and his calm, collected, and confident public image. Blue is also a reassuring, calming color, perhaps used to enhance his appeal to undecided voters worried about his relative lack of experience. But in comparison with John McCain’s website, which utilizes a solid, monochromatic dark blue, Obama’s site may appear too cheery or superfluous- while McCain is dependable, stolid, and experienced, Obama is a pop-culture celebrity who cares more about exciting imagery than political content.

Both candidates, however, undeniably use blue as a reference to the American flag, and avoid red, with its associations with socialism, communism, blood, and anger (one of us is a Chinese citizen, and is accustomed to websites decorated in shades of red, an indicator of a completely different political system). When red is used, it is almost universally in a negative sense. In a short slide show on Obama’s website attacking McCain’s tax plan, the words “Bush” and “McCain”- obviously negative for a Democratic candidate- are a vibrant red, which conjures up images of “red ink” (a common term for debt), blood, suffering, and (above all) the Republican party, whose supporters are commonly referred to as “red-staters.” Although red and blue are equal on the American flag, they are clearly not equal in the complex political psychology of color that has become ever more important as the internet has come to dominate political discourse.

-Shuolong Yang, Kaitlin Halady, Kevin Baumgartner-

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 04:08 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

So here’s our blog post analyzing Barack Obama's campaign website for our Rhetoric of Online Activism class, written by a group of three students with three different political viewpoints: Libertarian Estevan Flores, moderate Andrew Marantan and liberal (but fiscally conservative) Danny Zuckerman. Despite this variation, because we are all fiscally conservative, we were interested in analyzing how Obama presented his fiscal policy; we found Obama’s “Tax Cut Calculator” feature of his website is designed to serve a political purpose by presenting results differently depending on which candidate the cuts favor.

The feature gives visitors a quote of the tax cut they will receive from each candidate by inputting information about income, marital status, number of dependents, age and other financial-related information. Given the candidates’ policies, we were interested in how the calculator might present information that would be favorable to McCain. Up to the $200,000 income bracket, the tool presented the predicted tax cuts from each candidate side-by-side, with the Obama policy’s cut always higher or equal. However, upwards of $200,000 dollars, the economic group that McCain’s cuts are known to benefit more, rather than showing the values, it says: “You will probably not get a tax cut under the Obama-Biden plan.”

We found this interesting, because rather than showing information that might appear favorable to McCain, the Obama site omits the fact that individuals in this income bracket might benefit more from McCain’s policies. Politically, there is no benefit for the Obama campaign to admit that McCain’s tax cuts will be greater for a segment of the population; instead, they state that some people probably won’t get a tax break under the Obama-Biden plan. This is indicative of the socio-economic status of Obama supporters and his target audience – this group tends to be lower and middle class citizens, and his policies and website features are geared to appeal to them.

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 03:58 PM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

Hi, this is Ian, David, and Lexi and we're working on this blog as part of our web-activism class at Stanford University. We're all Obama supporters and this may factor into the way we critically analyze the McCain website.

It seems clear that the website's intended audience is primarily the standard conservative voter. On the front page, for example, there are several links leading the reader to donate and volunteer for the McCain-Palin campaign. Most of the advertisements on the website either attack or make fun of Obama and Biden. McCain also focuses on appealing to typical Republican positions of small government in his warnings that Obama will "spread the wealth around," insinuating that Obama is a "socialist" or backs ideals of a large and uncontrolled government. McCain argues that Obama will raise taxes on the hard working "Joe the Plumbers" of the world - his new go-to icon and talking point.

McCain attempts to spread his message via flashy videos, pictures and slogans, shying away from concrete facts and direct policy comparisons to Barack Obama. This is evident from the first entry into his website, as the audience is immediately shown a video, while concrete facts require deeper navigation. While this video featured once depicted Sarah Palin introducing herself with a wink and a smile, it now displays McCain talking directly into the camera, simplifying America's problems into a few bullet points. Even more striking is the video that follows, introducing McCain as a former Naval pilot and POW, attempting to establish credibility primarily through his military service and experience on an international stage.

Earlier on the website, there was a video of Sarah Palin, the running mate for McCain and it served as her introduction to the presidential race. Since her recent press conferences and deeper scrutiny into her background, polls have shown that Palin's popularity has decreased and she has been ineffective in swaying undecided voters. As the second most prominent member to the McCain campaign, Palin has been reduced to just a smiling face. On the McCain website, Palin is only seen through pictures and when attempting to find out more information on her through the "About" section, her name is even below that of McCain's wife. It seems as if the McCain campaign has resigned itself to the fact that Palin will not attract a significant amount of new voters.

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 03:36 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

The following blog post is a rhetorical analysis of the campaign website for John McCain from the viewpoints of three Stanford students who each identify himself as more Democratic in political persuasion.

Specifically, the focus of this analysis pertains to the apparent generation of a mythical narrative about ‘John McCain’. On the website this campaign tactic manifests itself literally on every page. The photos, the videos, and the written content itself, all seem to have arisen from a romanticized auto-biography. Far more of the content on every page addresses and explicates the history of McCain’s “service” both in the army and the Senate.
On the ‘About McCain’ page one can find the following

"As the son and grandson of distinguished Navy admirals, John McCain deeply values duty, honor and service of country. John attended college at the United States Naval Academy, and launched a 22-year career as a naval aviator upon his graduation. He continued the McCain tradition of service to country passed down to him from his father and grandfather when he asked to serve in the Vietnam War.
On July 29 1967, John narrowly survived the first of many near-death experiences during his lifetime while preparing to take off on a bombing mission…"

No, the main-page of ‘Why McCain’ does not go into detail about what McCain is going to do today and tomorrow for America in a globalized and technologically advanced world. In other words, it attempts to answer the question about ‘why’ we should elect him today as president not by explaining what he would actually do as president, but by presenting an almost hypnotic and unbelievably heroic life story.
Yet, the above narrative while useless itself in practicality, is compounded by a series of links to “The Story of John McCain” where one can read how “the story of John McCain is one defined by service and sacrifice in service to others and our country”, and another link to an interactive “McCain Timeline”.
Furthermore, the videos –which automatically play when the pages are uploaded- barrage the viewer with images of heroism as the classic Morgan Freeman-esque ‘cigarette-smoker-movie-voice’ makes ridiculous declarations about how McCain, and even his wife, have spent their ENTIRE lives ceaselessly in service to the United States… well, if this were magically true, and if they are the mavericks they say they are, wouldn’t the country be fundamentally better off? Either they’re not the mavericks and game changers they purport, or they haven’t spent their entire lives in service…
Unfortunately, this rhetorical technique, which serves as the very foundation of the website as well as for the nervous-system of the McCain campaign, is probably an effective method to gain votes from the American public.

It’s easy to forget that in this immaculately kept environment that McCain is a biological human who sits on the John while going to the bathroom.

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 02:50 PM | Permalink | Comments (14) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

We are writing this post in our writing and rhetoric class that looks at the intersection of the Internet and politics. Our group members are Max Del Real, Kelsey Walker and Claire Kouba. While Max is a registered Republican and Claire and Kelsey are registered Democrats, we are all Obama supporters. In this post we are analyzing the McCain/Palin campaign website.

Upon arriving at the site, the first thing we noticed was the option to pick a viewing preference depending on your political standing: “Supporter,” “Undecided,” or “Unregistered.” With this function, the site appears to be catering to multiple points of view – but there is a conspicuous lack of an option for a voter who is opposed to McCain. This reveals the target audience for the site: current supporters and potential votes. It is not meant to change anyone’s opinion; rather it is preaching to the choir (and to those considering joining the “team”).

This “target audience” is confirmed by the fact that all of the anti-Obama arguments are supported by little (if any) substantial evidence. Instead, these arguments are condensed into clever-sounding claims that sound good to those who are already McCain supporters. An example of this would be the “Decision Center,” where the site makes such assertions as “Obama says he would meet unconditionally with the world’s worst dictators, from Ahmadinejad to Castro to Kim Jong Il.” The lack of specific details leaves the reader of such a statement either blindly accepting the flaws of Obama’s foreign policy, or uncertain as to how the website came to this conclusion and why it is such a bad thing.

This sort of appeal to McCain’s base gets his intended audience riled up emotionally and more passionate about his campaign. Using this positive emotional appeal is thus highly effective with those who already agree with him, but does little to encourage actual debate about the candidates and their policies.

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 02:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

Hey fellow commrades! This is Karen Nesbitt, Emily Clopp, Christina O’Neal from the States. We are writing from our PWR 2: The Rhetoric of Online Activism… to you! Our main argument focuses around the rhetorical aspects of the official Barak Obama website, www.barakobama.com. In making assesments, biases are fairly common, so we want to awknowledge that we take a more liberal/Democratic stance on issues and are sophomores at Stanford University. We found the general loyout of the website to be straightforward and uniform, but in with a unique asthetic style. The aspects that we found most effective on his site were the initial image of his family shown when entering the site, the cleanliness and flow of the information, and the directs links to aid in being a proactive supporter.

We especially found the family portrait shown before entering the site to be appealing because it made us all feel that he is one of us: he is a family man, for the people, of the people, and by the people. For us, the idea of family and community centers around being unified, and we feel that this image along with the cohesive American colors and general set up of the website brings together his values and mission towards a progressive change for America. Being the first potential African American president, he does face discrimination, but makes it quite clear he isn’t discriminating against anybody in his campaign strategy – pulling his audience from extreme diversity. On his site, there is a tab soley devoted to “People”, which describes his involvement with various individuals of multicultural backgrounds. Next to each group, is his campaign symbol, which he has personalized to each group, which shows that he is willing and wants to adapt and incorporate all audiences for a better America. We found it very interesting as well that the site had a option of viewing it in Spanish, recognizing the large population of Hispanics that lives in America.

Achieving another sense of unified support from diverse backgrounds, the site includes on its main page a video which we found to be very powerful. The video was movement based, showing images of different places and people, but all working towards the same goal. Not only in his video is he emphasizing his goal of bringing politics back to the people, he is also placing the power of change in our hands. We believe he is making a strong rhetorical message by only being heard in the video, never seen, and even so, only speaking towards the end of the clip. Most of the video incorporates the viewpoints of various supporters and by centering it around community involvment, is making the upcoming election about the people. By showing the energy of the people dedicated to his cause, he is emphasizing that this election is “larger than life”, which enstills an excitement that viewers can feel that they are making a difference.

Obama is no doubt campaining with a big slogan: a call for change and a rise of hope. His slogan “Yes We Can” and his campaign strategies are to doubt risky, as are some of his rhetorical techniques of creating a hype around the upcoming election, but with every risk or challenge in life, you either go big, or go home. So Cairo, do you think he can?

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 02:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between American University in Cairo and Stanford University's Online Activism class. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

Our class on Online Activism was looking at the websites of Senator Obama and Senator McCain to study what rhetorical strategies they use online. Our group (Olivia, Ricardo and Amanda) decided to examine how the inclusion, or exclusion, of various campaign issues on Sen. Obama’s website shows ways that the Issues section of his website is directed at undecided voters.

One of the tabs under the “issues” section is “Family.” I (Olivia) was surprised to see this because I generally associate the term family in a political context with socially conservative ideas of “family values” and “the sanctity of the American family.” However, Sen. Obama uses this platform to present ideas about issues confronting working families, such as tax burdens and healthcare, potentially convincing socially conservative, family-oriented voters of his stance on these issues.

Sen. Obama also has a section on “Faith”. It serves a dual purpose: it describes Sen. Obama’s personal beliefs and helps refute the rumors that he is Muslim, while also explaining his opinion on how to reconcile religion and politics. Undecided voters have two of their concerns addressed by his Faith page- he both reassures those concerned by rumors, and promises to protect freedom of religion for those voters who do not share his own beliefs.

I (Ricardo) expected Sen. Obama’s website to include something about gun-control, and was dismayed to not find Sen. Obama’s stance on gun control on the website. Noting that there are both opponents, and supporters of gun control amongst the Democratic voters, Sen. Obama’s campaign must either appeal to both types of voters, or completely omit the issue. Rather than attempting to appear “all things at once,” Sen. Obama campaign avoided presenting a possibly mixed up message on its webpage. Sen. Obama’s website makes a general appeal among the undecided population by providing an ambiguity that neither attracts, nor excludes any specific standpoint.

Overall, Sen. Obama’s treatment of the issues of family, faith and gun control shows his careful approach to dealing with key issues in a way that would appeal to swing voters. Only time will tell if his strategy proves effective.

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 02:34 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between University of Sydney and Stanford University. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

We are writing for the Program in Writing and Rhetoric class The Rhetoric of Research.

Our eight page essay on rhetoric and research was due today. We all wrote it yesterday. As a result of our procrastination, we are writing this on a substantial amount of sleep debt. While writing this, we are procrastinating. It took us at least 20 minutes to decide on a suitable title and topic for this blog post.

In the process of sharing experiences, we discovered remarkable similarities in our methods of procrastination. Foremost among our discoveries was that research is a prominent and vital part of the procrastination toolkit of the Stanford student. Some of us use the web, some the library, but the motivation is the same. We are never satisfied with the amount of information we have. As we research, we change our interests and our ideas about our research topic. Because of this constant change, we put off the actual writing of the paper until the very last possible moment.

Each of us, Denis, Betselot, and Marisa, procrastinate in different ways, but food, Napping, YouTube, and Facebook all figure prominently in our procrastination strategies.

Denis drinks copious amounts of water which keeps the brain running and enhances the flow of writing. He uses the internet to do a lot of research in order to learn what he is actually writing about. This results in lots of information, but unfortunately little of it makes its way into the essay because there is not much time.

Betselot likes to think that she makes up for her lack of a Facebook account through keeping track of what the world is up to through Youtube. This helps her writing process because only hours of Youtubing will incite the guilty feeling she needs to sit and write a paper as best as she can.

Marisa productively procrastinates by waiting until the absolute last minute to write her essay. She does this because she needs as much time as possible to read through all of her sources and create a coherent outline that will shape her essay. During the period of procrastination, Marisa eats too many Wheat Thins and too many peanut butter banana sandwiches to give her energy throughout the process.

All of our methods of procrastination result in excellent papers and full, sleepy, entertained students.

Questions:

Do you procrastinate? Why? How?
What effect does caffeine have on your nervous system?
Do you use the library, the web, or both?

Posted by The Rhetoric of Research, Stanford at 04:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (10)

This blog entry is part of a Fall 2008 blogging exchange between University of Sydney and Stanford University. To read all the entries, follow this thread; be sure read the earliest entries first.

We are Carlos Shimizu, Yong Liang Tan, and Nathaniel Shar, and we're studying the "rhetoric of research" -- analyzing the ways people talk to each other about academic topics. Carlos' current research project aims to illustrate how various genres of music utilize rhetoric for a specific agenda, and to show how their use of rhetoric may or may not differ with the 5 traditional canons of rhetoric. Yong's project compares the rhetoric of Western and Chinese perspectives of female infanticide in China in the late 20th century. Nathaniel's research investigates the relationship between the rhetoric of mathematics teaching and the prevalence of innumeracy in American society.

Despite our diverse interests, all our papers will have one thing in common: they will all be revised, perhaps multiple times. Peer editing is an integral part of this process. This year, we will be conducting our peer edits online rather than in person.

We expect there will be several differences between electronic peer editing and the real-life version. First of all, electronic editing gives us the opportunity to write a larger volume of comments. Writing in the margins with pencil puts a severe limit on the amount one can say, but in an electronic format one can write an unlimited amount. This means that a peer editor must choose carefully on what to comment, and to what length; some will include the most important points, but others will take the shortcut of just writing the comments that come to mind first.

The impersonality of the computer screen can embolden editors so that they feel more secure about giving frank comments. In the traditional system, the editor and author must convene at some point to discuss the comments. Writing online delays this meeting, so the ensuing discussion can be about already-revised work rather than the same raw draft. This is a positive aspect because it allows the writing process to move faster without sacrificing quality. Even in the worst case, the process will move at the same speed, in the case that the meeting serves only to clarify the online comments as opposed to discussion of new points. The picture shows Yong discussing his essay with his peer editors in a series of letters before they convene in real life.

This is still speculation, and there may be other benefits and/or drawbacks whose impacts remain to be seen. For example, if the computer system crashes, the process could be delayed, as no one could access the essays or comments. And some editors may not be comfortable using the editing tools of Microsoft Word (or another word-processing program). But, on the whole, we feel that electronic peer-editing will be an improvement over the traditional process.

By: Nathaniel Shar, Yong Liang Tan, and Carlos Shimizu
Image credits: Top image by "Zeptomoon" on Wikiversity (CC-A); bottom image by the authors.

Posted by The Rhetoric of Research, Stanford at 04:22 PM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Every country has its shantytowns and Brazil is famous, or rather infamous, for its favelas. These favelas have over the years received more and more attention due to the continuous rise of illegal activity, particularly drug trafficking and urban violence. This specific issue has been tackled in the documentary “News from a Personal War” which has been created in relation to the movie “City of God”. The documentary raises a lot of questions by analyzing the case of a favela in Rio de Janeiro. What is the government of Brazil doing to combat the crime in the favelas? What are the changes that have happened since the appearance of the documentary? What are the reasons for those changes? What can be done to improve conditions? These are the questions this paper attempts to answer with relation to this favela and uses the case of Sao Paolo as a comparison in the methods of combating urban crime. The paper is divided into several parts. The first section is a short one describing the current situation in Brazil with regards to a relatively recent report by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime. The second section is additionally separated into two; the first part talks about the economic improvements of Rio de Janeiro, which occurred partially due to the decrease of corruption, while the other part talks about how the government deals with the urban crime and the favelas. The third part talks about the political structure of Brazil as a major setback to fighting urban crime and uses the law enforcement forces as an example. The last part of the body talks about Sao Paolo as a case study, and comparison to Rio de Janeiro, because of their achievement in reducing the murder rate in the state. Even though the purpose of this paper was to analyze the government’s role in urban crime fighting, it did not manage to achieve this objective due to the scarcity of sources for research. However, it has reached certain conclusions with regard to what can be done and what are the aspects that affect the success or failure of resolving this particular issue.

Posted by AUC: Writing in the Social Sciences at 01:32 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (0)

In my paper, I examine the favela in the context of Brazil’s democracy. The favela is a state within the state; although geographically an integral part of Rio de Janeiro, it is a socially, economically and politically marginalized state within Brazil. This paper is an attempt to find out what role the democratic government is playing in the favela wars and how come the democracy is not benefiting the large class of Brazilian favelados? The huge gap between the rich and the poor is a major characteristic of the extremely stratified Brazilian society; also, the military regime, which ruled Brazil till 1985 initiating the social injustice, is still indirectly controlling the distribution of wealth and political power, even under the flag of democracy. I evaluate the situation on three interesting political levels: The first is the politics within the favela itself. I use two examples of favelas, one profiting from vote selling, and the other not participating in elections; at the end, both are politically apathetic and thus excluded from Brazil’s democracy. Instead, the favela has a de facto internal government headed by the dealers and acknowledged by the locals, a factor the documentary succeeds to show. The second level is the national level, the Brazilian democracy. Whereas Brazil undoubtedly has an efficient democratic system, its democracy seems to be operating with the favelas external to its drive. The government played a minor role in the last 50 years attempting to find new housings for the favelados and failed. The elite’s privileges are to be safe-guarded and the favelas neglected, even in the basic services, like health and education. The third level of political disintegration is the international level. The international level is surprisingly present, both in pressuring the Brazilian government and selling armaments to the dealers. Both the economic threat of Wall Street firms and the political power of Washington D.C were practiced against today’s president Lula, the Working Party candidate, during his first elections in 2002. The American ‘intervention’ might be explained as an anti-leftist stance, but its exaggerated intensity stays enigmatic. Those international pressures seem to represent an international (or mainly American) interest in the preservation of the status quo. Today’s Brazil is arguably moving towards a better democracy under President Lula with his plans for the redistribution of lands and a long term plan to end the seclusion of the favelados. The favelados, however, have established their own state with their own rules within Brazil, a new state, where they might finally get a voice.

Posted by AUC: Writing in the Social Sciences at 12:52 PM | Permalink

I just wanted to jump in here and reintroduce phase two of an assignment that my AUC students, in a "Writing in the Social Sciences Class" shared with Donna Hunter's Stanford class, "Rhetoric of Criminality." Back in September, both of our classes viewed the documentary, "News from a Personal War" which was filmed in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro, and focuses on the drug wars there. It includes interviews with favela residents, drug dealers, and young favelados hired by the dealers, and also with the police who regularly raid the favelas.

When our students watched the film we asked them, among other things, to identify questions that the film raises, but does not answer. Donna's students posted their initial responses to the film right away on the blog. My students did research-based response papers, looking to "answer" or at least further flesh-out some of the questions they had identified.

My students are now posting abstracts of the papers they wrote in response to the questions they had investigated. We regret the lag time between Donna's classes original postings (to which some of my students responded in the comments section) and our abstracts, which hopefully will still be of interest to them! Our month of September was a little truncated as we were on an abbreviated schedule because of Ramadan and then on holiday during that last week of September into the first week in October because of the Eid.

Posted by Belle Gironda, American University in Cairo at 12:36 AM | Permalink | Comments (4)

This is my abstract to the response paper I wrote for my writing in the social sciences class. the paper goes on discussing an issue that is not fully addresses in the documentary and that it female role in the favela and how is that connected to the issue of labor...
“News from a Personal War” documentary addresses the life in one of Rio de Janeiro’s favelas, Santa Marta, in Brazil. Its principal focus falls on the confrontation between the police attacks and the drug dealers facing that. The dynamics of those showdowns and the impact they have on the residents of the favela is adequately discussed. However, one of the major issues left un-visited is the issue of gender and females’ role in the favela. He who watches the documentary can obviously see the absence of the female perspectives on what goes on in the favela. Only two cases the documentary shows: Janete and Hilda. Both give an account on the female situation inside the favela. Janete’s narrative gives nothing but a desperate image of the women as she recounts the situation of the children in the favela and how uncontrollable it is for their mothers to try and divert the fate of being gangsters and drug dealers at the age of 12. It is clear through the documentary that women are not empowered and they are not able to alter the situation and the lives of their children. Even the children in the documentary are mostly males and there is no case of a female child among them. On the other hand, there is another instance of a working female mother, Hilda, whose condition is not much better than what Janete is talking about. But, her presence in the documentary throws the idea of female labor in the favela. It raises the question of how effective they are in the labor force in the favela whose main labor is dealing with drugs. As it turns out from research, women do have a role in the labor force as they essentially become the provider for their households at the times their husbands are imprisoned for being involved in the police-dealers’ confrontations. Consequently, women find their way in the labor market and usually work as domestics for well of families to try to cope to the precarious lifestyle they lead.

Posted by AUC: Writing in the Social Sciences at 03:00 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

Hello students in Eva's and Helle's classes,
Now that you've experienced speaking to fellow students across the Atlantic, please take a moment to reflect on the experience in a comment of about 50 words to this blog entry. In your comment, consider:

- what you learned about cultural identities (your own and others') and cultural rhetoric

- how the technology worked in terms of facilitating or inhibiting cross-cultural rhetoric and understanding

- what you found memorable about the experience and what was not working too well

Posted by Helle Rytkonen at 01:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (16) | TrackBacks (0)

Yesterday, my Cultural Interfaces class had its exciting first video conference with students at Orebro University -- the first of three video exchanges we'll have this quarter.

(To see more pictures from our video conference, visit our photo stream on flickr)

To make it even more special, we were led in our workshop by John Paval, a consultant in oral expression and a Stanford Alum, now living in Stockholm. He led us through a very innovative workshop that moved students from a virtual auditorium to activities in their small groups and focused on the practice and performance of oratory. In rhetorical terms, we focused on the canons of memory and delivery, and how shifting audience influences the rhetorical situation of an argument.

For our part, I was really excited by the activities, which -- despite a hectic pace -- seemed to foster a lot of laughter and deep learning on the part of the students. I've participated in many video conferences over the years, but I found this model of bringing in an outside expert to lead an international workshop to be a really really rewarding one and a promising new direction for some of our CCR workshops to take.

Looking forward to our continued exchanges with Orebro this term, I was pleased to see the students involved in productive exchanges with one another. It was a good first step in our international collaboration.

Posted by Christine Alfano at 10:17 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

So, this is the first blog i have ever written and I'm thinking ill talk about the topic i chose to research and how my actual research is coming along. I chose to do my research paper on a large, but not very well-known group in America: Gun owners. There are many different types of people who own firearms and many different reasons they have for owning them. I decided to write about this group of people because i realized certain stereotypes surround them that are untrue and i thought it would be good to show the many different people that actually make up this demographic.

The research has gone much better than i had anticipated. Due to my inability to navigate the library, i had just planned on finding one or two books and then just cross my fingers and tryto find some additional online sources. However, the class trip to the library was really good for me and taught me about the library. I ended up finding a ton of sources both in books and online. A really interesting book i found was Armed America . It was a book with many pictures of gun owners holding their firearms. Normally this would sound like a slightly weird picture book, but underneath the pictures were the person's reason for owning a gun. There were families, old people, young people, rich people, poor people, and people of many races. I thought it was a really neat book because it captured what i will be trying to communicate to my reader in my paper which is that gun owners are a surprisingly diverse group of people.

Posted by at 09:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

These days, “social entrepreneurship” is one of many new buzzphrases entering our lives, especially for those of us living near Silicon Valley. Companies like Grameenphone and Kiva have been praised for the impact they’ve had in developing countries, one of which is Vietnam. This past week, I have been exploring both journal articles and books relevant to my study of Vietnamese women entrepreneurs. The question I’m trying to address is how these women, specifically impoverished women, are leveraging emerging technologies and/or social entrepreneurship companies to help themselves and their families. The books I’ve explored give an overview on women’s issues in Vietnam, but I’ve had less success finding articles and books that focus specifically on women entrepreneurs in Vietnam – the one gem I’ve found is a collection of interviews, “Voices of Vietnamese Women Entrepreneurs.” The focus is on existing entrepreneurs and their legal, financial and societal hurdles overcome thus far and that still remain. It will be an excellent primary source, but I am also looking for materials about how future entrepreneurs can be enabled.

While nobody denies the impact that microfinance institutions like Grameenbank and Kiva have made on individual entrepreneurs’ lives, I am interested in further potential of such companies making a difference, i.e. future challenges and possible solutions. I came upon a Cornell paper entitled “Micro-finance and the empowerment of women,” which revealed that there is actually some controversy regarding microfinance. The four main schools of thought, according to the paper, are:

-Those who stress positive results and believe in sustainable microfinance programs to empower women
-Those who see limitations in the current model but attributes these limitations to poor microfinance program design
-Those who see limitations in the current model but believe microfinance should be used as part of a larger strategy to empower women
-Those who see microfinance as a waste of resources

I’ve been trying to narrow the focus of my topic, and this paper provided me with a few thinking points:

-Are social entrepreneurial companies just the new craze? What are the chances of sustainability?
-How can it be employed with other programs and/or institutions?
-What are the negative impacts microfinance can have that people aren’t thinking about – e.g. loan repayment pressure?
-What factors cause some women to succeed under microfinance programs?
-Since the paper was written in the early 2000s, how may new and developing companies have supported/disproved its conclusion?

Though the paper addresses microfinance in relation to all developing countries, I need to hone in on a specific demographic for the scope of my investigation. Furthermore, both the interviews and this paper remind me that I must not look at Vietnamese women entrepreneurs as a single entity, but as people affected by circumstance – by their values, their values, and their government.

Posted by at 06:37 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

My research project, as of now, has no true thesis. But the overall research project is geared towards breaking down and analyzing the structure, interaction and overall presence of the Ethnically Themed Dormitories at Stanford University. I want to mainly focus on the interactions between Muwekma-Tah-Ruk (the Native American Indian Theme Dorm) and Casa Zapata (the Latino/Chicano Theme Dorm). I will mainly generate research by collecting interviews.

In all honesty, I haven't started to research my project thoroughly. I have found a mild amount of primary sources, but I haven't gotten into the meat of the research yet. However, an interesting source fell right into my lap, and I didn't even realize it. Well, until now.

Today, in the United States (and maybe the entire Western-Hemisphere) it was Columbus Day. To most in the States, Columbus day is just a nice excuse to not go to work. But for the indigenous people of the entire Western Hemisphere it was Indigenous People's Day. It is a movement to reclaim the notion of "discovery" and to come together as one oppressed group. Today was a demonstration to the world. For five hundred sixteen years, Indigenous people have survived, and will continue to survive. How does this play into the Ethnic Theme Dorms? I'm getting there.

The San Francisco Bay Area Movement, is one of particular prowess and recognition. Native people from all over the world come to show their support for the day and to demonstrate together on the streets of San Francisco. The demonstrations however, do not start on the city streets. The day starts on Alcatraz Island. Alcatraz is former prison that was reclaimed in the 1960s by Native Peoples in an effort to regain unoccupied Government lands. This became the future site of the Sunrise Celebration, every October 13th.

The Stanford American Indian Organization plays a huge role in planning the event and bringing a large presence to the celebration. This is not a light undertaking. Rousing over-worked students at three am so that they can go stand on an Island at five am in whipping winds on a freezing October morning is no easy task. But somehow, every year, Muwekma-tah-ruk manages to pull in huge numbers for this truly amazing day of celebration.

This is where my research comes into play. All of the Ethnic Theme Dorms at Stanford University (there are four of them), communicate openly and have very friendly relations. However the two dorms that are the most closely related are Muwekma and Casa Zapata. Not only on the basis of being cooperative/friend-like dorms, but also in their ethnic histories. Indigenous people from North and South American are separated only by an invisible border. This being said, it would seem that the involvement of the Latino and Chicano (Casa Zapata) student population at Stanford would be significant. But it was quite the opposite. Only two students (including myself) had any interest whatsoever in participating in this day of solidarity amongst indigenous groups. This is baffling. The Asian-American Themed Dorm (Okada) had a huge group of students attend this program.
This attendance difference, didn't strike me as pertinent until this afternoon. This would be a interesting research addition to my original plan. What was Okada's stake in this indigenous movement? Also why was Zapata so apathetic about a day that specifically impacts their ethnic group? Is this a pattern that happens yearly (...as I am new to this celebration)?

This event brought a new aspect into my research. I think that this is a quintessential moment in defining relations, not just between the dorms, but also between the two ethic groups. I am excited to have participated in this event and to have discovered this new ethnic dynamic.

Posted by at 06:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (9)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

I will consider my first week of research for my project on the cyber subculture of music pirating in my Cross-Cultural Rhetoric class at Stanford University a success. I went to the library and came away with books; I searched in online databases and discovered scholarly articles; I searched on Google and found the federal websites I had hoped for. The most interesting aspect of my research, though, has been my most unconventional: my blog activity. I created an account on AlbumHunt.com, a music directory website used by the 2008 pirate-types (not the same as your old school Napster or Kazaa users). Along with music download links, the site also has Forum and Community pages for its users. The forum topics range from new music to politics to relationships to ethics. In fact, I began to participate in a thread called “Is immorality something we learned?” A user named dreamz began the thread by stating: “We as humans have evolved. We've been changing since before Roman times. As times go on society changes. Do you believe that our morals have changed with time?” Before I joined the thread, the discussion ranged from the innate evilness of humanity because of Eve’s actions in Genesis to the influence of graphic music and video games.

Then user kakarot differentiated between “learned behavior” (e.g. racism) and “inherent behavior” (e.g. homosexuality) and whether these inherent behaviors can be considered immoral. My first post on the site, the forty-third on this thread, stated the irony in such a topic being discussed on an illegal music downloading site and the immorality of that not-so-foreign practice to these users. User Damien explained the music-downloading practice by returning to the notion that “mankind is weak,” and although downloading might be wrong, it’s still cheaper than buying. He continued to mention the presence of studies that examine why people commit immoral acts, but the lack of studies explaining why people don’t choose the immoral option. He argued that immoral acts can be justified whereas moral acts are just challenging for people. Some really thoughtful and educated posts have been made on the thread.
My activity in this forum has given me a new enthusiasm for my project. I’m no longer dealing only with impersonal books and articles, but I am actually interacting with my sources. Hopefully the rest of my research is as fun as this has been…

Posted by at 07:41 PM | Permalink | Comments (7)

I'm Melissa Leavitt, the instructor for the "Rhetoric of Online Activism" class at Stanford. The focus of our class has been to explore the impact of new media and participatory media on politics and culture. In the coming weeks, the "Online Activism" class at Stanford and a class on argument from the American University of Cairo will be posting entries discussing and analyzing the McCain-Palin and Obama-Biden web sites. Our goal is to analyze the rhetorical strategies and political arguments of these sites, and also to explore how cultural context impacts the effectiveness of these arguments. After the election, we'll return to these posts, and comment on them in light of the election results. We welcome comments on these posts to keep our conversation going!

Posted by Stanford: Online Activism at 10:11 AM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

I’m not usually one to bandy the phrase “paradigm shift” around, but it really suits the early stages of my research this quarter. Prior to PWR 2, it was always the same deal: decide my topic on a hunch, and find the substantiating research later. Of course, the step that came in-between those two was “cross fingers tightly,” and I consider myself lucky that the routine always panned out. This time, though, I can truly say guided my topic decision, and not just personal experience. Not a surprise, considering the here-and-new nature of this PWR course. Chances have never been greater that I’d find something relevant in my normal routine, and that’s the story behind my first source. Who knows, I may have even put Cultural Interfaces at the top of my preference list with this New York Times article in mind.

The story was written by Clive Thompson, and focuses on one or two specific tools offered on Facebook—status updates, and pictures. The author then describes the pattern of user behavior associated with these features. By article’s end, he even pinpoints and labels what he views as the psychological phenomenon underlying this behavior.

The phenomenon Thompson speaks of is called “ambient intimacy.” It’s the idea that people can feel closely connected by simply reading the step-by-step story of each other’s lives—those things Facebook calls “status updates.” He extends this idea to the use of sites like Twitter (where people can ONLY express themselves via status update), but also looks back to its history in other media. Like with text messaging: Thompson references a past study regarding long-distance lovers and their methods of developing a “co-presence” from miles away. In many cases, the meat-and-potatoes of their communications were simple status-update text messages—presumably to let their partner in on a daily routine.
This article certainly brings up some questions on the topic of ambient intimacy. For instance, do status updates have the same satisfying effect on a reader if they are broadcast to everyone, rather than sent specifically to that reader? Beyond Thompson’s status update phenomenon, though, it’s the way he went about writing his article that most excites me. He opened the door to all sorts of behavioral analysis on Facebook, and is one of the first major journalists to look beyond the fact that the site has “cool” features. In this sense his article struck oil, but also let me know that there’s more to dig for.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/07/magazine/07awareness-t.html?pagewanted=3&_r=2&hp

Posted by at 09:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (6)

This entry was written in response to the Research Blogging Assignment for Stanford's Fall 2008 Cultural Interfaces class. For more about this assignment, click here. You can leave a comment on this post by clicking on the "comment" link below.

Just this past year when my age-old parents decided to convert our home to completely solar powered energy it struck me that if they are concerned with saving energy than things must really be getting serious where our environment is concerned. When I got back on campus this year, the posters and signs that decorate White Plaza and every bathroom stall became more noticeable to me and I became curious as to why Stanford is making such a strong effort to “go green”. I’ve always been one to turn of the lights and make sure my water bottles go into the recycling bin, but as I research further and am learning more about Stanford’s sustainability efforts I find myself asking why is this so important now but at the same time I want to do more…

Stanford University has always been at the forefront of new developments, technologies, and advances in almost every field of research, so it is no surprise that we are paving the way for environmental changes worldwide by starting with our own campus. The website sustainable.stanford.edu highlights Stanford initiatives toward sustainability in areas such as energy, food, buildings, land, transportation, waste and water. This year, President Hennessy introduced “The Stanford Challenge” which will raise $4.3 billion over five years aimed at creating a university “that will better serve the world through the quality, impact, and vision of its research”.

The Stanford Challenge has allocated $250 million toward Stanford’s Initiative on the Environment and Sustainability, which will further research in this area as well as support campus-wide environmental awareness. Established in 2008, the Student Green Fund grants $20,000 each year to students or student groups working toward improving sustainability at Stanford. With the success of the new Jerry Yang and Akiko Yamazaki Environment + Energy Building, also known as Y2E2, and which uses 56% less energy and 50% less total water than traditional buildings of the same size, Stanford has laid plans for a completely Green Dorm set to open next school year. The environmental engineers behind the project say that it’s “expected to generate more electricity than it uses, emit no net carbons and use half the water of comparable dorms”.

It is clear that Stanford is making huge efforts, along with spending billions of dollars, to preserve resources as well as educate and inform Stanford affiliates about the benefits to sustainable living. As I continue my research, I am curious to find out what has prompted Stanford to make such drastic changes in the last few years and who is pushing for this change. Where and how are we planning to acquire $4.3 billion and is it going to take away from other aspects of Stanford that could benefit the students more? (i.e. financial aid, newer classrooms, computers, etc.) Are these environmentally conscious decisions only available because of Stanford’s financial security and advanced technology, or will other schools across the nation be able to afford these changes as well? These are all questions that I hope to better understand because at this point it seems as if it’s a double edged sword. Is building a new green dorm instead of just converting the dorms we already have the right choice? I’m all for everyone, including Stanford, to do their fare share at saving our planet, but somehow it seems as though Stanford is sacrificing more than the rest of the world is willing to give up.

Posted by at 12:44 PM | Permalink | Comments (8)

This week, my students begin their research blogging assignment, which asks them to post a blog entry that focuses on their assessment of a specific source, interview, survey results, or even their own developing argument as part of their research process. All the student projects are focused on a particular culture or subculture as their starting point; however, from past experience, I know that they will evolve into very sharp, focused arguments over the next few weeks. Here's what you can look forward to reading over the next few weeks:

Week of Oct. 6th:
Green culture/environmentalism
Facebook/ social networking sites

Week of Oct. 13th:
Ethnic-theme dorms on Stanford campus (where students opt to leave with people of the same cultural background/race)
Stereotypes of gun owners in the US
Women entrepreneurs in Vietnams and gender ideology
Cyber Music Pirates (illegal music sharing online)

Week of Oct 20th:
Blogging culture
Online communities as emerging subcultures
Online information and social equality
Internet addiction and the PC Bangs (internet cafes) of South Korea

Week of Oct 27th:
Persecution of Christians in China
Online fan culture: fantasy football
American baseball - materialism vs recreation
L.A. Gang culture

We invite your comments or responses, particularly on those topics that interest you or intersect with research of your own.

Posted by Christine Alfano at 08:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Tomorrow, Monday, October 6, we'll kick off the first of 14 videoconferences at Stanford with partners in Sweden, Australia, and Russia - with many more connections to come!

Two classes will connect to discuss Beauty Standards, Body Image, and Gender Norms Across the Globe (the lesson plan will be linked here). Teams will have a chance to watch several videos, comment on the issues, bring up points from assigned articles and readings, and then together, as a globally-distributed team, develop a concept for a NEW TOY, DOLL, or VIDEO AD that would promote a different kind of beauty standard, body image, or gender norm.

Teams examined John Riviello's Barbie Doll Flash Animation http://www.johnriviello.com/bodyimage/barbie.html as well as a trailer for the NewBoy Muslim Barbie, Fulla: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WqmCAzxUxI and then compared two videos on Altered Bodies:
Dover's Evolution http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYhCn0jf46U and Korea's 200 Pound Beauty: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj4ZGKanyJ4 Students also discussed assigned readings (see extended entry).

Students who participated in this video conference, please take a moment to reflect on the experience in a comment of about 50-100 words in response to this blog entry. In your comment, consider:

- what you learned about visual rhetoric across cultures
- how the technology worked in terms of facilitating or inhibiting cross-cultural rhetoric and understanding
- what you found memorable about the experience and what you learned the most!

Also, please share with blog readers what your group focused on and what you learned from it. If you had time to develop a NEW toy, doll, video ad idea, or op-ad concept, please describe that here or post any links / material from your group work!

For readings, students read the following:

-- a chapter from Toni Morrison's The Bluest Eye
-- Susie Orbach's article, "Fat is an Advertising Issue" from Campaign Magazine (2005) on the Dove Campaign
-- Susan McClelland's article “Distorted Images: Western Cultures Exporting Their Dangerous Obsession with Thinness” from Maclean's (2000)

Posted by Alyssa O'Brien at 10:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (13)

As I think about cultures and subcultures this fall for my Cultural Interfaces class, it's hard not to become drawn into one really characteristic but enigmatic aspect of American cultural: political activism. With the 2008 Presidential Elections on the horizon, nothing epitomizes America more right now, in my mind, than the question of Who's Running, Who's Debating, and Who to Vote for this November (except perhaps for economic woes, which has been handily folded into the election subculture right now too).

I haven't blogged about this yet -- I know that there are classes moving toward blogging here at CCR about politics soon -- but I couldn't help myself when I found this Don't Vote video posted to one of my friend's Facebook profile:

Click here to see it yourself.

The very fact that it was posted (and so easily, may I add) to a Social Networking Site, is fascinating in itself to me. However, the OpAd itself is so rich -- as an argument, as a piece of rhetoric, and, in fact as a self-identified example of what I might call "Viral Activism" -- that I felt it belong linked here, inviting comment. I'm sure to my students this video is old news: dorm e-mail lists are such a fertile online community, I'm sure that anyone subscribed to this list has watched this many times over.

However, still, I'm posting it here as my contribution to this burgeoning subculture of viral activism, and I invite you to watch and comment on this video here at CCR -- thinking about it in those terms:

• as an argument
  
• as a piece of rhetoric
  
• as an online phenomenon
  
• and even as a marker of American political culture.

I find myself at a loss to name comparable texts produced internationally, by other cultures. Are they out there? Is America playing catch-up here with this type of online political marketing? Or are we witnessing something new here, a new genre, that within the next few years will continue to evolve and spread across borders?

If nothing else, it's an interesting piece to watch - but I look forward to reading your thoughts on it as well.

Posted by Christine Alfano at 03:43 PM | Permalink | Comments (12) | TrackBacks (0)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

Firstly, by highlighting the segregation between the police, drug dealers, and
the "dwellers" - normal citizens who live in the favela, the documentary shows
that the disconnection between the classes in the society seriously hampers any
potential improvement to society and contributes to the exacerbation of crime.
In one scene, we recall the narrator stating that the city's media for a long
time did not report on what happened in the favela. If the rich and other people
of the society behave in such an apathetic way, what reason is there for the
drug-dealers to turn over a new leaf? Also, we were given the impression that
once someone is born into the favela, there is no escaping the social class and
its implications. With no alternative career path, one would be hard pressed not
to get involved in drug-dealing and other crimes. Another result of the gap
between the social classes is miscommunication and consequential mistrust. When
the police arrested a minor, the women of the favela followed the police that
they would not illegally abuse the suspect before he reached the police station
to be lawfully charged. The suspicion and animosity between the police and drug
dealers will surely impede any efforts of compromise.

Secondly, we feel that the film also argues that there is no absolute good or
bad. At the start of the documentary, we saw a very positive image of a
righteous policeman willing to sacrifice his life for the greater good of the
society. Later on in the film, we were given a new perspective when the
drug-dealers were praised for buying medicine for the impoverished sick and
gifting presents to children. The documentary seems to argue that not criminals
do not necessarily harm society. Ironically, some dwellers of the favela
described the police as being corrupt and brutal, often accepting bribes, making
false accusations, and beating suspects regardless of whether they were minors.
The film confuses the audience's moral compass, and in doing so reminds its
viewers to consider matters from different perspectives and refrain from making
hasty judgments.

Posted by at 04:09 PM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

What questions does the film raise and leave unanswered? What areas do you feel could be further investigated?
- The role of the middle class. How they interacted with the favelas?
- How cocaine made the transition from an upper class drug to the poorer class?
- What other governmental organizations should be involved with the favelas?
- What was the role of the rest of the world, and growing global drug culture in establishing the favelas as a centre for drug distribution?
- Why is it so easy to escape from jail? And why does nobody care?
- Why is the education system so poor, and what role does the lack of education play in the proliferation of underage drug dealers?
- Do racial interactions play a role in the favelas?
- Where does corruption in the police force stem from?

Source:Voices from the global margin : confronting poverty and inventing new lives in the Andes
Mitchell, William P.

Posted by at 05:07 PM | Permalink

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

“News from a Personal War” exposes the violence in the favela of Rio de Janeiro through candid interviews of the police, the favela dwellers, and the dealers. The film primarily relies on pathos to convey the full impact of the conflict within the favela but also employs, to a lesser extent, ethos and logos.

Ethos: The voiceover in the introductory scene immediately carries a strong local accent, helping the viewers identify with the setting and the subjects of the interviews that follow. That the interviews are self-incriminating for both police and dealers convinces the audience to accept the authenticity of their messages. Additionally, the vivid on-scene footage adds to the impact of these candid responses.

Pathos: Images of squalor are paired with the dealers’ economic justification. In addition, the director uses cuts between several contrasting scenes, most notably the cut scenes employed between both the police and dealer funerals towards the end of the movie. In doing so, the director leads the viewers to see the strong similarities in each group’s perception of the futility of their conflict, thus showing that violence is infinitely self-perpetuating.

Logos: Other than the statistics presented at the beginning of the film and the mention of the correlation between the rise of drug-dealing and the homicide rate, the filmmakers rely exclusively on the careful selection of images of violence and poverty as well as the words of the police and drug dealers to depict the hopelessness of the endless “personal war.”

By: Kiana Abram, Jeff Lu, and Michael White (Stanford University)

Posted by at 05:06 PM | Permalink | TrackBacks (0)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

The inherent gap between the rich and the poor can be pinpointed as a root cause of violence. Cocaine originally began as the “rich man’s drug,” before trickling into poorer areas, known as the favelas. The result was a society with a large, drug-using population. However, since the elite did not want to give up their drugs but wanted protection from harm by the drug dealers in the favelas, a corrupt police force was formed, one that would repress the poor but turn a blind eye to the rich. At the same time, the dealers were forming a unified front as well. Established in the prisons, criminals began banding together against corrupt authority, leading to the growth of organized crime both in and out of prisons.

As time went on, the growing drug trade in the favelas became more lucrative. Drug-dealing paid $300 a week, and compared to the minimum wage of $112 a month, it became a more attractive option for favela-dwellers trying to feed their families. Furthermore, children in the favelas, disrespected by both the rich and their poverty-stricken peers, found respect as gun-wielding drug dealers.

The film supports these claims mainly through the use of personal testimonies from ordinary citizens and drug dealers in the favelas as well as from members of the BOPE police force.

Posted by at 05:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

The film argues that the current situation in Rio de Janeiro is the result of cocaine being introduced to the city. Cocaine was much more profitable than marijuana, the previous drug of choice, and this helped make it worth the risks of dealing. Compounding this problem is the fact that educated political prisoners were imprisoned with drug dealers, allowing them to create an organized crime network. The resulting syndicate, called Commando Vermehlo, planned to expand social programs in the favelas (the slums of Rio de Janeiro) but financed them with cocaine sales. They gained popular support by helping many of the poor residents of the favelas, which has made it much more difficult for the police to arrest and prosecute the dealers. The syndicate collapsed in the wake of major arrests and murders in the 1980's and 1990's, leaving the favelas under the control of a patchwork of different drug dealers and gangs. The lack of organization has created large amounts of chaos as different drug dealers worked against and attacked each other. Furthermore, the current socioeconomic status quo in Brazil, that of wide income disparities between rich and poor, has encouraged the chaos by giving the state no reason to interfere in the favelas besides to contain them. These income disparities have also encouraged the drug trade since it is much more profitable to sell drugs than to have a typical honest job. Police corruption also contributes to the problem by further biasing the residents of the favelas against them and enabling the gangs to arm themselves much more easily. The wealthy elite also fuel the conflict by purchasing cocaine and failing to push for reforms that could create a more honest police force or improve life in the slums.

Posted by at 05:01 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

Argument: People in the favelas feel the need to turn to crime in order pursue a better life for themselves and their families.

The documentary suggests that nothing is being done about this problem; at one point, the narrator states that there is no solution. There is a war present in the favela between the cops and the drug dealers, and this confrontation cannot be resolved because the people do not seem willing to accept an honest police force. The police chief, who is interviewed in the documentary, questions: Is there a real interest in an honest police? Although the drug dealers and the community living in the favela argue that the cops are crooks and are corrupt, the community does not actively seek out help from political institutions in Rio de Janeiro.

Our evidence can be broken up into two categories, as demonstrated below.

1. Reaction to police and society:
• The drug dealers believe that they have to arm themselves in order to protect themselves from police invasions. The biggest crooks are the police, by design, as the police chief admits in the documentary.
• Violence continues to rise as a form of retaliation against the police, who do not care.
• Organized crime brings a sense of community to the people in the favelas. The drug dealers help the people and commit their crimes for the people. The criminals begin to think collectively against the dictatorship.
• The new generation is in a suicidal mode. They do not really value their lives because they are so impoverished. As such, it is easier for them to turn to crime.
• Criminals just want peace, justice, and freedom, according to the man in jail. They want peace in jail, social justice for all, and they want to be freed from imprisonment.

2. Material possessions, pride, etc:
• The people in the favela can be paid R$120 without turning to drug trafficking, but by dealing drugs, they have the opportunity to earn R$300.
• Turning to crime and making money allow the underprivileged to obtain a sense of pride and power.
• Women love guys with big guns.
• Drug dealers do not want to take people’s lives. They just want money.
• Criminals like having good things. Working legally does not provide enough money for them to purchase material possessions like tennis shoes, clothing, etc.

Posted by at 04:46 PM | Permalink | Comments (2)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

The documentary’s use of rhetorical strategies reveals that the conflict in the favela in Brazil is not clear cut as in the cops are good and the drug dealers are bad, but in reality the conflict started because of a corrupt society in which both sides have terrible faults.
The film shows the audience firsthand the terrible conditions these people are forced to live and how both sides view each other and who those caught in the cross fire support more. Throughout most of the film, the drug dealers are not shown as people who solely care about their profits, but as people who care about the community in which they live. By utilizing this unique perspective, the audience can hear the voice of these socially unacceptable professionals. In talking of their struggles, the documentary uses the rhetorical strategy of ethos as they visually and orally show the struggles the drug dealers go through. The drug dealers are given a certain validity as we see the trials with which they must live.
We also see the other side of the spectrum as the documentary portrays the police in a negative light as well. One particular scene comes to mind as the police lead an adolescent boy around the favela as his worried family trails behind. The use of pathos creates empathy for viewers as it seems that the police are the antithesis of their role in society: harming rather than protecting. The humiliation and worry of the family is evident and causes us to sympathize with the family.
The use of logos is a convoluted aspect of the film. On one hand, the situation in the favela is the opposite of what’s expected. The police are corrupt and arrest the common people while the drug dealers help the underprivileged. On the other hand, the basic needs of society are a logical perspective. The impoverished need to eat, the sick need medicine, etc and thus the role of the drug dealer is necessary in society.

Posted by at 03:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

Throughout the documentary, various people show that violence is glorified and commonplace in the community because of the increased benefits that the violence indirectly produces. A boy is shown singing a lighthearted song about violence, and women are described as drawn to men or boys with larger guns.

The “dwellers” perceive the dealers as guardians against poverty and the corruption of the police. In one scene, a dealer recounts how he has “an obligation” to protect the people while in another, this relationship between the dealers and the dwellers is reaffirmed when kids describe how the dealers “throw out Christmas toys” to them. Dealers also purchase medicine and other necessities when families cannot afford them. The dealers’ generous appearance also encourages the younger generation to join in with the drug dealers and thus gain the status and respect that comes with the job.

The director appeals to the audience’s emotions through wide shots displaying the squalor that results from having two million dwellers crammed into a small area. The police are also displayed as corrupt, violent, and uncaring, making viewers less likely to sympathize with them. Because of the corruptness of the police, we are more likely to empathize with the youth’s tendency to choose drug dealing as a job as opposed to a different, lawful job.

Posted by at 03:02 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

What questions does the film raise and leave unanswered?
-Are the drug dealers more of a help or hindrance to the favela?
-Could Rio de Janeira handle an honest police force?
-What is the role of the women in the favela?
-Does anybody ever try to leave the favela?
-What is the role of the combat units in the favela?
-What happens to the good cops? Do they get killed or become corrupt?
-What is the life expectancy of members in the favela versus the rest of Brazil?
-Is the favela shrinking because the death rate is so high?
-Do some of the non-drug dealers in the favela want to stop the dealing?
-How does the favela compare to slums in other places?
-Do the people even care about going to prison since their lives outside of prison are already so bad?
-Do the prisons care about keeping up security?
-Is there any sort of rehabilitation system in Rio de Janeira for these chronic criminals?

What areas do you feel could be investigated further?
-family lives of the drug dealers
-education of the favela community
-prison enforcement problems
-government corruption
-the development of the favela
-rapping in the favela
-statistics of people who have been arrested
-organized crime in the prisons

Posted by at 02:59 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

This post was written in response to a blogging assignment between a class at American University in Cairo and a Stanford University class on the Rhetoric of Criminality. For more details about this activity, visit the Stanford professor's introductory blog post about the assignment.

The violence seen in the film stems from the reality that the favela citizens are trying to take back what a highly disorganized and corrupt system has denied and taken from them. Due to police corruption and intense economic polarization, the people who live in the favela have had to resort to drug dealing and violence just to survive. We heard from the police chief that it economically makes more sense to deal drugs and get $300 per week, then work a modest job for $112 a month, so why not pick dealing? At the beginning, cocaine was seen as a high class drug. However, when cocaine became prominent in the poorer regions, the amount of violence skyrocketed.
Due to the dictatorship in Brazil, in the early 1950’s prison inmates found a way to make the present prison system work in their favor. Together, inmates formulated large-scale, organized crime units to provide for their community. They established themselves under the motto, “Peace, justice, and freedom”. Residents of the favela have since relied on the dealers for their survival; from affordable, easy access to much needed prescriptions, protection from law enforcement, to Christmas presents for children. Most people in the community stand behind the dealers because they have come to depend on them. Culturally, the dealers have achieved celebrity status; the bigger the gun, the more desirable the man.

Posted by at 02:58 PM | Permalink

This activity marks the beginning of communication between Stanford students in Writing and Rhetoric 1, “The Virtue of Vice and the Vice of Virtue: The Rhetoric of Criminality,” and American University at Cairo students in “Writing in the Social Sciences”: RHET 322. Professor Gironda explains that many of her AUC students are majoring in Political Science (with a few in Anthropology and Psychology) and that they have chosen to research and write about the internationalization of democracy "looking particularly at the EU and Eastern Europe and the Middle East," as well as "the role of children in local, national and international conflicts from Rio de Janeiro to Palestine." As a result of these interests, the students chose to watch and analyze the documentary, “News from a Personal War,” which investigates drug dealing, the police and favela residents in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.

What follows are a series of questions the students in Cairo and at Stanford were asked to consider when watching the film.

1.Does the film make, or at least suggest, any cause and effect or arguments about the violence and squalor it depicts and other social/political/historical/ economic events or circumstances within or outside Brazil?
2.If so, make note of these claims. How does the film support these claims or describe these relationships?
3. How is rhetoric deployed in the film? What is the role of ethos/pathos and logos and what is the balance among these strategies?
4. Is the film making an identifiable argument and, if so, what kinds of evidence does it present?
5. What questions does the film raise and leave unanswered? What areas do you feel could be investigated further?

If any of you readers have watched "News from a Personal War," we welcome your thoughts as well.

Posted by Donna Hunter, Stanford at 10:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (2) | TrackBacks (0)

This entry is part of an assignment called the "Stanford Cultures Project" for a sophomore writing course, Cultural Interfaces, at Stanford University. To learn more about the assignment, read this blogpost

"A new low in tasteless behavior" -- Robert Shapiro, part of OJ Simpson Defense Team

"I wish we had a band like that" -- Robert Birgeneau, Chancellor of UC Berkeley

The Leland Stanford Junior *pause* University Marching Band is one of the most controversial aspects of Stanford University life. Amongst students, alumni, faculty, administrators, and fans, the band represents either immense school pride or absolute embarrassment. The difference between the LSJUMB and other "traditional" bands, for those of you who don't know, is the utter disregard for any and all organization, composure, and traditional practicum. LSJUMB is a scatter band; they don't walk in straight lines, they don't wear typical uniforms, and somehow despite the chaos on the field, they manage to display interesting and entertaining story-lines on the field.

The Band partakes in many activities throughout the year that are... um... unique to Stanford University. The most well-known and well-loved of these traditions is Band Run. Band Run is the Stanford version of the Running of the Bulls. The Band leads the way by running an elaborate course across campus chased by the entire undergraduate student body. Band Run culminates in the main Quad with a rousing rendition of "All Right Now" amid euphoric students spelling out the name of the University. This tradition is always the first night of freshmen move-in, just to make sure the froshies are settled properly. To say the least, the Band makes Stanford one of the most fun and different universities in the world.

The Band also claims two very important symbols of Stanford U: the Tree and the Dollies. The school's unofficial mascot, the Tree, is selected every year during a grueling week of "tryouts". Candidates perform various stunts around campus to impress the Band and former Trees. Last year one of the contestants swallowed a live snake during the auditions, but rest easy, he was disqualified (not even the Band is that crazy). And because of such behavior, the Tree always gets a breathalyzer test before each home football game.

The Dollies are the beloved five females who comprise the school's unofficial cheerleaders, on-field and on-court at every Cardinal sporting event. The Tree and Dollies are certainly a point of pride for the school. Even ESPN's Pat Forde listed performing as the Stanford Tree for a game as one of the top ten "things to do to fulfill your life before kicking the bucket."

Despite the unique flavor that the Band brings to the university, its behavior at venues across the country have caused many to look upon the entire culture of the program with disdain. As with any other band, the LSJUMB travels with the football team, basketball team and other athletic teams as they each play their games at other universities. At halftime, a show ensues with an interesting storyline that refers to something relating to the theme of the visiting university. It isn’t common for the halftime shows to supersede the game in terms of lasting impact…unless you’re a part of LSJUMB. At various universities the across America Stanford’s marching band has actually been banned from attending sporting events due to some of the skits they’ve put on. Notre Dame has denied the band access to its university because of a particular storyline in which the band implied that the priests and nuns were hypocrites and not as proper as they are thought to be. So when the band came out on the field dressed as nuns and priests with beers in their hands and humping each other…you can imagine how that went over with the crowd. However, the LSJUMB is probably the only band in the history of...let’s say ,western civilization!! to be banned from a state, not just a university but an actual state. In 1990 the band performed at an Oregon State-Stanford football game. During the halftime show they poked fun at the state’s struggling logging industry and even suggested (in reference to the problems the state had with protecting the endangered spotted owl) that Oregonians smoke marijuana and get high for a living, instead of logging and cutting down trees…(nothing more needs to be said after that). As a result the governor banned the marching band from Oregon for 3 years and it would be ten years before the LSJUMB was allowed to perform at Oregon State again. The attitude and presentation of the band has not only antagonized other universities and their fans but many alumni of Stanford University find fault with the band as well, so much so that they won’t even support their alma mater via alumni funds. Indeed, the very reason that the band is so endearing to many, their unique style and disregard for tradition, is the same reason that some alumni and fans consider them a joke and an embarrassment.

Clearly, the Band represents a delicate love/hate relationship amongst Stanford affiliates. Although the school is not united in their sentiments towards the Band's behavior, traditions, and tactics on the field, it can be agreed upon that the Leland Stanford Junior University Marching Band plays by their own rules. For better or for worse, the Band is an autonomous power-house on Stanford campus. No doubt the Tree, the Dollies, and the Band itself are the most controversial group to have ever been banned from Oregon.

Posted by Stanford: Cultural Interfaces at 09:38 AM | Permalink | Comments (7) | TrackBacks (0)

This entry is part of an assignment called the "Stanford Cultures Project" for a sophomore writing course, Cultural Interfaces, at Stanford University. To learn more about the assignment, read this blogpost

Most people are familiar with Stanford's academic prestige, but many overlook the outstanding athletics that Stanford has to offer as well. For thirteen years running Stanford has taken home the NCAA Director's Cup, which is awarded to the athletic program that wins the most National Championships each year. Their excellence in academics paired with unmatched athlete ability prompted us to explore the unique culture of Stanford student-athletes in this post.

Stanford athletes go through extreme training regimens; many work-outs start before dawn and most athletic teams have weight lifting as well as practice each day. Stanford athletics is famous for producing world-class Olympians and prominent professionals, pushing their athletes to their full physical capability. But the hard work has paid off, Stanford is second to UCLA in overall National Championships and is considered by many to be the premier athletic program in the country.

Because athletes are known for spending countless hours together training, traveling, and competing they often develop a special, deeper bond than regular friendships. Teammates become family and even athletes from different sports share a connection through their common experience at Stanford. In this way, Stanford athletics can be considered a subculture on campus. A subculture that is defined by an ability to balance intense academics with even tougher physical demands, an ability to eat healthy, sleep more, and sacrifice typical college nights out all for the love of the game.

Although the championships and medals are glorified, many athletes would attest that the physical demand is a high price to pay. Not only the physical but the emotional stresses that come with having such a time commitment each day causes many athletes to question their dedication. Overworked athletes spend countless hours are spent in rehabilitation or physical therapy; many teams even remain on campus throughout the summer and most holidays breaks to continue training. A Stanford baseball player exclaimed that " the thing about division 1 sports, at least for baseball, is that coaches or the college are only interested in the "win", while I on the other hand, am focused on a career. Sometimes I feel like I am pushed to my limits, rode too hard, and at times feel like I may be harming my chances for playing in the long run."

Aside from the physical training and actual competition, there are other dimensions to the life of a Stanford athlete. They are representatives of Stanford to the outside community and are responsible for upholding the values that Stanford stands for while acting as role models to younger athletes. "It's about commitment, dedication and responsibility. It's about bettering myself while also trying to be a respectable representative of Stanford." -Chris Hadley '10 Track & Field

Posted by Stanford: Cultural Interfaces at 09:35 AM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0)

This entry is part of an assignment called the "Stanford Cultures Project" for a sophomore writing course, Cultural Interfaces, at Stanford University. To learn more about the assignment, read this blogpost

Your watch strikes 12:00 AM, and you still have half a paper and a problem set to finish. Just as you get settled into your desk, put the buds in your ears, and open up the word processor--"Hey - I think I'm gonna go to sleep." But the real message is what your roommate didn't say: "You can't study in here now. Go to Meyer or something."

The good news is that you're in good company. Between extracurricular activities, attending classes, and fountain hopping, most Stanford students do not have much time for work during the day. Many save their papers, problem sets and studying for the last minute - and even those who do not have late nights. A Stanford sophomore studying engineering says: "I haven't had time all day to study and I need to get this [problem set] done. It's not really due, but I don't really have time to do it tomorrow either. I might as well do it now, get it out of the way and not have to worry about it."

The bad news is that, in the wee hours of the night, available study spaces are scarce. Most buildings around campus are closed by ten, and their neighboring coffee shops even earlier. In fact, before 2008-2009, even most libraries were closed by midnight. It wasn't until a survey revealed that 83.4% of undergrads were "unsatisfied or very unsatisfied with the current past-midnight study spaces" that the school administration extended weeknight hours at Green Library, one of Stanford's largest libraries.

Before this policy change, students were generally funneled to a smaller library, Meyer, for their late-night studying needs. Open 24 hours a day, it will probably remain the late night studier's haven this academic year. Most wouldn't say the all-night study room has any charm, but a distinct character has definitely emerged over the years. The Meyer sub-culture has been described as "all-business": a place where you can't work and sneeze at the same time. The productivity that goes on under Meyer's tawny roof at night is clear to anyone who walks in the next morning. Papers, staples, and empty energy drink cans litter the tables, and you'll find the occasional grad student still asleep in a plush chair.

Meyer's study rooms are fairly spacious, but it obviously couldn't accommodate every late night studier. So where else do students go?

Their rooms, mainly. We suspect that even more people would stay home if everyone at Stanford had single rooms. Generally, though, they will have roommates to reconcile schedules with; a lot of times, this means working under dim desk lamps (or under no light at all), minimizing paper rustling and refraining from typing furiously when a great idea comes.

One student commiserates: "If your roommate is a night owl, studying late is pretty simple. But if he goes to sleep early and is easily disturbed, burning the midnight oil is a little harder. My roommate this year is fine with my desk light, but last year was another story: I had to go to Meyer when my roommate went to sleep."

What if late night studiers want the comfort of their own room but want to avoid the all-business character of Meyer?

There are options. Stanford recently renovated Old Union, a student space open to the public until 2AM. With comfortable couches and an eatery, students can study and relax at the same time. Green Library, too, is open until 2AM, if students desire a more studious and quiet environment.

At Stanford, late night studiers are abound; no matter what your studying style or studying hours, there's a place on campus for you.

Posted by Stanford: Cultural Interfaces at 09:34 AM | Permalink | Comments (17) | TrackBacks (0)

This entry is part of an assignment called the "Stanford Cultures Project" for a sophomore writing course, Cultural Interfaces, at Stanford University. To learn more about the assignment, read this blogpost

Stanford University is a very diverse campus, made up of students with varied interests and backgrounds. This not only includes students as different as those from the East or West Coast, but adding a whole new perspective on life are the international students from all over the world. Coming from completely different cultures, these international students can offer insight on a myriad of subjects that can help alter other people's own perspectives.

Almost seven percent or 425 members of the undergrad community are international. On a personal level, Stanford’s international students prove to be great roommates and friends. International students infuse fresh ideas and styles into everyday life. Many students introduce their personal tastes to their peers, some of which are quite foreign. Examples include unfamiliar consumer products like this Japanese Ramune drink, different clothing style, and unique hobbies such as hat collecting.

These students also provide an international perspective that makes ordinary conversations more interesting. Overall, the exchange goes both ways. Not only are international students learning in their new country, they also enrich the lives of all students in the Stanford community.

Stanford provides a large amount of support for its international community. Bechtel International Centre organises a large number of activities for international students, and also provides advising on immigration issues. The annual International Student Orientation (ISO), a milestone programme for international freshmen, is also hosted by Bechtel. The interior design of Bechtel reflects this confluence of cultures -- there are subtle touches plastered all over the walls, such as small artifacts from around the world.

Just like local students, international students participate in diverse activities all around the world. Overseas studies programmes such as the Bing Overseas Studies Programme (BOSP) are often popular amongst international students; it could be because international students are already living 'overseas', way outside their comfort zone. The photo above is a photo taken at Cambridge University in the UK. Just as it shows a unique juxtaposition of the old and new cultures, international students bring their respective cultures to Stanford as well, empowering Stanford to be a melting pot of different styles and practices.

Posted by Stanford: Cultural Interfaces at 09:33 AM | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBacks (0)