I agree with Eyman that Human-Computer Interactions (HCI) and digital rhetoric overlap with each other. In his book Digital Rhetoric, Eyman links these two concepts together, stating that “while HCI is clearly more aligned with computer science and computer engineering than with communications, it shares with digital rhetoric… a focus on how people use technological systems to accomplish a wide range of tasks, and the deployment of terms such as “user” and “usability” also provide a connection between these fields” (Eyman 56). However, as these two concepts overlap and connect, the idea of Internet studies fits perfectly here as well.
Internet studies refer to a social network regarding users online and how they navigate the web. We often examine the internet and theorize its functionality in regards to users. Eyman goes on to argue that “social networking theory is commensurate with a digital rhetoric approach to the study of networked communication, so there is also an opportunity to connect at the level of theory as well” (Eyman 60). My argument here is akin to Eyman’s in that social network theory is a “subfield” of digital rhetoric, much like HCI (Eyman 58). Internet studies provide a deep look into media consumption.
In 2020, Netflix released a documentary called The Social Dilemma. This film touched upon the many dangers of Internet use and how technology has taken over society already. After watching this film, I was struck with a sense that researchers (and people involved in the film) provide their own rhetoric about technology. Internet studies nowadays have a more complex approach to analysis, as neutrality does not exist in the world of technology. Everything has two or more sides, from politics to celebrity controversy. If these Internet studies serve as a crucial analysis, how could we not consider it digital rhetoric?
Leave a Reply