This course inspired me to ponder one of the most mind-boggling academic questions of my entire college career. What exactly is “digital rhetoric?” As of right now, I do not have a solid answer in my own words. However, I do agree with some of the things Doug Eyman mentions in his book all about this particular topic. Eyman draws on a plethora of researchers who have studied it. He jogs the history of the term to conclude what could be a strong theory on what digital rhetoric is.
Hypertext vs Rhetoric
I personally believe that digital rhetoric goes beyond just adding one word to the other. This concept is more than persuading an audience through the use of computer technology and the internet. However, to understand what digital rhetoric is, we must look at how to use it. Eyman recalls the use of hypertext, and the early traces of it as used against print work. Readers, instead of searching for topics in a print book, now have online access to related topics simply by clicking on a hyperlink. These hyperlinks send readers to learn more about the topic related to the word they just clicked on. This system highlights readers’ persuasion based on how they desire more knowlede. However, Eyman remarks the difference between “hyperlink theory” and “digital rhetoric,” by means of documenting the shift from one to the other.
The Tree of Digital Rhetoric
Eyman argues that “digital rhetoric is not tied to a single discipline and, I will suggest, is strengthened by drawing on theories and methods from multiple disciplines and fields while remaining true to its foundation in rhetoric” (Eyman 30). I agree entirely with this, because there are lots of ways one can go about digital persuasion. This theory applies to many means of media, professions and audiences. While I still do not have a specific personal definition, Eyman’s opinion, based on the many works he draws upon, is understandable and valid.
Leave a Reply