I read over the assigned section on Intertextuality multiple times. I cannot seem to grasp this reading. That being said, it triggered some thoughts. I am completely unsure if those thoughts are related or not. However, I am still going to share them. Those thoughts are revolved around writing online.
My main takeaway from this piece was that writing online is an adjustment. I also was lead to start thinking about how many texts are related. In my head, I picture a large spiderweb. This web has a bunch of different online articles. The “webs” that connect the pieces are essentially hyperlinks in articles.
My Experience Writing Online
It’s only week two, but I am going to talk about my sports writing. Sorry (not really). Oftentimes when I publish a piece online, I link another related story. These stories are usually from the same website. They also relate to this new article in some way. The previous article will be embedded through a link directly in the new one. To me, that is intertextuality. Relation between writing pieces.
Other times, I may reference or link another online article that is not on the same site. Whether I am citing a take or statistic, it works the same. Therefore, my articles are linked to a ton of other pieces online.
Back to the spiderweb I am picturing. I am sure that if I went through all my articles, I could make a web of how they call connect. Oftentimes the pieces are on different teams or games, yet they still find a way to connect.
Influence
Another thought that this article provoked was the influence of other pieces. To me, I thought about influence in the sense of structure. All types of sports journalism influences each other due to the way they are written. You don’t write those pieces the same as other types of journalism. The structure is probably due to how online search results work. I wish I had some experience with writing before the online journalism era.
I hope to understand intertextuality more.
Leave a Reply