Synthesis is a collection of ideas to form a theory, which is annoyingly how Eyman writes. It is the process of using a collection of ideas to form a theory. While it can be a useful way to explain a theory, it can often become convoluted, the problem with Eyman. Nevertheless, it can be used to explain the concept of digital rhetoric.
What is Rhetoric?
Rhetoric is using persuasive speaking in writing. It’s designed to be persuasive, often using wordplay and descriptive language to achieve this goal. It’s instrumental for it to affect the audience, it’s the goal of the writing.
And Digital Rhetoric?
As mentioned before, Eyman gives many ideas to form his general idea of what digital rhetoric is.
Understanding computer literacy is a necessary component. It forms the cornerstone of digital literacy. Without it, it’s almost impossible to use and key in order to develop this kind of rhetoric.
Richard Lanham is credited with creating the phrase “digital rhetoric.” His approach focuses primarily on the attributes of digital texts, seen through the lens of previous literary forms. While it was the approach at the time, it wasn’t the best approach. Rhetoric analysis has to fit the medium and in this case, it didn’t meet the mark.
As the term rhetoric has expanded beyond its persuasive meaning, it serves as the main component of our understanding of knowledge. It adapts to fit the framework of the medium, whether it be digitally or on paper. As such, anyway the rhetoric is described can affect our idea of it.
Digital rhetoric is no different. Digital tells us exactly how the rhetoric is presented and thus, how to view it. That alone is helpful to help us navigate and understand it. We now know how to view it, now all we have to do is read it.