Barf Blog Evaluation

          The Barf Blog is a well-qualified blog, successfully meeting all of the criteria I have set for evaluating. This criterion includes: creditable writers, visual appeal, and subject of posts. This blog reveals to us things you may not find anywhere else, like a featured post about sex cereal. It does this while including an informative aspect in other posts about much more important issues such as an E-Coli outbreak. The Barf Blog is not as repulsive as it comes off to be, in fact you just want to keep on reading.

            Once you reach the home page and scroll down to read the blogs you see a “Contributors” column on the right hand side of the page. This column informs us on what qualifies these writers. The first thing you see in each short paragraph about the author is what college or university they are associated with, all of them under the teaching category. If you look on the “About” page you find this description of their posts, “Opinions must be evidence-based – with references – reliable and relevant. The barfblog authors edit each other, often viciously.” This really gives you a feel of their creditability—explaining how they make sure each post is reliable, through a process of harsh editing as well as making sure the opinions are backed up with evidence. This all reassures me that these posts are well thought out and written by authors I can trust.

            What I typically look for in a good blog post are pictures and videos to show me what they are really talking about. Each post you see has at least one picture per paragraph. Some of the pictures are of the specific event the author is writing about, but others are just thrown in there. For example in a post about the FDA reducing food inspections they have a random low quality picture of a family eating. Although some including my self at times may think this is odd, I think it brings more character to what they are writing about. Now you have to feel bad looking at the happy family eating their dinner and knowing that due to FDA budget cuts they could possibly be getting sick from that food on their plate. Another thing I like about the appearance is that they also add videos. Whether it is a video about the issue at hand or someone else such as Stephen Colbert commenting on the issue as well. These pictures and videos add a lot to what you are reading about.

             One of the most important pieces to evaluating a blog is the subject of the posts. Although this is a blog that self-proclaimed to only write about “Current food safety issues” we see a little bit of everything in here. There is even one post on sexism, in fact I believe the only reason it qualified to be posted was because it was sexism coming from a master chief reality show. Most posts aren’t about food safety; they just have to do with food. I think this diversity in subject really makes the blog a lot more interesting because it includes such controversial unknown stories.
             The qualified writers, story-like visuals, and diverse posts make this blog a great one. It manages to bring in the more serious issues, but manages to include the lighthearted humorous posts. I would give this blog a gold star. 

Chocolate Revised

            The emotions you feel as you bite into chocolate; whether it’s a cookie, truffle, piece of cake, ice cream, anything. As it slowly melts in your mouth filling every taste bud with joy, your mind starts flooding with past experiences and connections with this decadent dessert. It’s a kind of chocolaty feminine connection that leads back to the beginning of this family. I’ve only heard stories of the soothing affect it has had on my elders, but I have experienced it first hand with the ones closest to me.

            The subtle crack of the chocolate as it drops onto my tongue causes memories of my mother to fill my mind. From when I was young and would share chocolate cookies and treats with her. Questioning her about the world as I lick off the chocolate smeared all over my fingers. Mom with her motherly patience would answer every one of those questions until I passed out from a sugar high. Other memories are from more recent times when we go out for chocolate croissants and coffee as I confide in her. Questioning her on how to fix the common troubles one has while growing up. The soothing words of my mother combined with the sweetness of the chocolaty croissant made for a relaxing morning that calms my nerves.

            As the chocolate softens in my mouth memories of my grandmother flood into my mind. Tea time with my Googoo. My favorite blanket spread out on the floor, on top sits my tiny tea set; the teapot and cups filled with milk and the little plates filled with Oreos along with my grandmother’s fancy chocolates. I once again bombarded, this time, my grandmother with questions. She giggled at my curiosity and answered them too as her crystal blue eyes stared into mine. Memories from when I was older fill me as well. The most common one is walking into my grandparent’s apartment and being welcomed with the smell of fresh baked brownies, her specialty. We sit together over a plate of brownies and have girl talk that includes the fascinating stories of my relatives that I never had the chance to meet. Taking mental notes on the examples they’ve set for me to fix my common life problems.

            Us Ekstrom women, though many of us have never met, bond through this dessert. The memories that consume us as we consume the chocolate fill our brains to capacity. Memories consisting of stories of our older generations who all had common challenges. Maybe I can blame becoming such a strong feminist on the stories I hear of my great, great grandmother. She planted this seed by being one of the first women to stand up and go to college before it was ever socially accepted, right when the men only rule was freshly eliminated. This large family connection all started through the Ekstrom women’s favorite dessert chocolate—and this is how we are all connected.

Rhetorical Analysis

MR. CLEMENT: Well, Justice Kennedy, two points. First of all, the very fact that there are 1,100 provisions of Federal law that define the terms "marriage" and "spouse" goes a long way to showing that Federal law has not just stayed completely out of these issues. It's gotten involved in them in a variety of contexts where there is an independent Federal power that supported that. Now, the second thing is the fact that DOMA involves all 1,100 statutes at once is not really a sign of its irrationality. It is a sign that what it is, and all it has ever purported to be, is a definitional provision. And like every other provision in the Dictionary Act, what it does is it defines the term wherever it appears in Federal law in a consistent way. And that was part and parcel of what Congress was trying to accomplish with DOMA in 1996. (154)

            Mr. Clement did a great job thinking on his toes while being torn apart by the Supreme Court Justices in a case against DOMA. He addresses every point in a calmly fashion and backs it up with evidence. Clement has a well-qualified argument by centering all of his claims and evidence around his largest point; DOMA is a definitional provision.

            This being a rebuttal from a debate Mr. Clement did a good job of structuring his argument to counter attack each point. Though it is choppy, each sentence reflects the previous point of the Justice. All while staying quick to the point in order to get everything in before he is interrupted. The most important part of this structure is that it all revolves around the biggest point. Cleverly answering all of the Justice Kennedy’s  points while pointing them in the direction of DOMA being a definitional provision. A perfect example of this is how he opens, “First of all, the very fact that there are 1,100 provisions of Federal law that define the terms "marriage" and "spouse" goes a long way to showing that Federal law has not just stayed completely out of these issues.” As he points us in this direction he uses logos to start out strong and ends the sentence with his claim. This way by the time you read his claim it has already been backed up; not giving you a chance to second-guess this claim.

            Clement accomplishes all this while still maintaining a calm and collected tone. This tone gives him creditability because he isn’t rudely accusing anything no is he asking any demeaning questions; he is simply stating the facts. Also in comparison to most of the Justice’s sass and disrespectful responses, it makes him look like the more trustworthy speaker.

             Clement uses such a tone because the decision is being made by the Supreme Court Justices so he needs to appeal to them as his audience. Being respectful and showing credibility is essential for accomplishing this. In order to win over the opinion of a Justice you have to really prove to them that you are qualified and that is what Clement has been doing successfully. Like I pointed out earlier the structure of his sentences and over all argument are set up to prove his claim before he even states it. Add his tone to that and you have the perfect show for a hard to please audience.

            This argument was very well done. From the structure, tone, and appeal to the audience—Mr. Clement nailed it. He counter attacks each claim thrown at him, with the claims of his own draws a bigger picture, and has the tone to please the audience. He succeeded in making his case clear and doing that while thinking on your feet is a very large accomplishment.