Final Manuscript W Table

Media• Rhetoric• lnterper i To read the 41st edition of Comm-Entary: Simply search for “commentary UNH” in your browser Or: https://cola.unh.edu/communication/opportunities/comm-entary Or scan the QR Code below with your phone Funding provided by the Student Activity Fee ii Comm-Entary Staff Executive Board Ellie Humphreys Editor in Chief Student Organizations Liaison Jamie Azulay Editing Chair Sarah DeSimone Editing Chair Brian Heaney Editing Chair Molly Pizza Editing Chair Brooke Marston Manuscript Chair Meaghan Scotti Author and Board Liaison Organizer Maya Latour Design Chair Hannah Magliocchetti Digital Chair Editorial Board Thomas Butt Editor Maggie Hicks Editor Danielle Liska Editor Cameron Magner Editor Tyler McLaughlin Editor Jocelyn Kenyon Editor Megan Switzgable Editor Faculty Advisor R. Michael Jackson Cover Art Digital Drawing by Anna Humphreys: Communication in the Era of Covid iii Dear Reader, Welcome to the 41st edition of Comm-Entary, the undergraduate research journal of the University of New Hampshire’s Communication Department. Our dedicated team of editors has spent the past year collaborating and working hard to bring you this newest edition that features some fascinating pieces on media, rhetoric, and interpersonal studies. We are so excited to share it with you. The annual publication of Comm-Entary is a time-honored tradition here at UNH’s Communication Department. Through this annual publication, we celebrate the academic excellence achieved by young scholars within our field of study. Comm-Entary has continued to grow over the past 41 years to provide a platform to share the unique perspectives of UNH’s Communication students with a global audience, reaching readers on six continents and in dozens of countries worldwide. This year’s edition is especially fitting for the era of COVID-19, as the publication features more multimedia and digital works than ever before, a true testament to how digitized our communication has become in these times. We hoped to represent this important evolution of communication in this edition’s cover artwork: a digital drawing of one of UNH’s signature landmarks, Thompson Hall, surrounded by various motifs of digital communication. In the year since the outbreak of COVID-19, our team has faced many unusual challenges, but took them head on with a sense of passion and determination that made me proud to be a part of this organization. The flexibility and commitment of our Editorial Board and student editors made the publication of the 41st edition such a success. And, of course, none of it would have been possible without the guidance and leadership of our incredible faculty advisor, Professor Michael Jackson. Thank you everyone for your hard work, dedication, and passion for learning that keeps this journal going year after year. Comm-Entary is truly a celebration of scholarship and young minds coming together to create something lasting. From the Comm-Entary team to you, we thank you for celebrating with us and we hope you enjoy! Sincerely, Ellie Humphreys Editor-in-Chief iv Table of Contents “College Students Hold the Keys to Cultivate Civility” by Evan Edmonds 1 “Changing the World One Girl at a Time: The Barbie Dream Gap Project” by Jamie Azulay 5 “Breaking News: Journalism is at the Brink of Extinction” by Jamie Azulay 12 “Apologetic Discourse in Sexual Allegation Scandals” by Jake Connolly 21 “LGBTQ+ Representation in Friends” by Sarah DeSimone 30 “Memorial Narratives: A Local Syncretic Memorial and How it Projects Public Identities” by Danielle Forte 37 “Nike’s Dream Crazy Movement” by Brian Heaney 46 “The Marketplace of Internet Data and Surveillance” by Margaret Hicks 54 “The Analysis of the 9/11 Memorial as Ritualistic” by Jocelyn Kenyon 76 “Positive Street Art” by Gabrielle Masseur 85 “Going Viral(ish) in 2020” by Gabrielle Podmore 93 Introduction to Brooke Marston’s Essays in Comm-Entary by Nora A. Draper 99 v “United States of Satire: Borat and Political Culture Jamming as a “Get-Out-The-Vote” Effort” by Brooke Marston 100 ”Ethnomethodology of Gameplay: A Collaborative Enactment of Meaning, Rules, and Structure” by Brooke Marston 104 “The Cool Candidate: Bridging the Gaps of the Modern Meme Candidacy, from Bloomberg to Biden” by Brooke Marston 112 “Emancipation and Exploitation: Examining the Political Roots and Social Consequences of the Contraceptive Pill” by Brooke Marston 120 “Campaigning With The Stars: Examining the Growing Intersection of Fandom and Politics” by Brooke Marston 134 Honors Theses and Multimedia Messages, 2021 Honors Theses: “Uses Unaddressed: How Social Technologies Tacitly Allow Gender-Based Violence” by Brooke Marston "Art Spaces as Third Places for Everyday Political Talk" by Alexa McNamara Multimedia Messages: “Dealing with Absolutes” by David Hadley "Behind the Farm Stand” by David Hadley “Borderlines” by ELUNIA a.k.a. Elizabeth Langfeld “Fake Geek Girl: Analyzing (and Gamifying) Gendered Fan Gatekeeping” by Brooke Marston Edmonds 1 College Students Hold the Keys to Cultivate Civility Evan Edmonds Unprecedented changes due to a global pandemic, a divisive 2020 presidential election, nationwide social developments and more have exacerbated a nationwide issue - the way people in the United States converse and argue. It’s easy to allow the current circumstances of the world to overwhelm us and our conversations, but all that does is doom us to fall into repetitive patterns that won’t solve anything. The negative state of discourse has developed over the years in the way that people become increasingly abrasive when met with viewpoints in opposition to their own. The way to unlearn these new unfortunate tendencies needs to be practiced and taught, particularly in the hands of the nation’s future generations. Young people - particularly college students - have a tremendous responsibility in holding the keys to unlocking more positive and meaningful communication. The first step is identifying the problem and putting solutions into practice. The United States has fallen into habits in the realm of conversation that harbor an “argument culture,” explained by Georgetown professor of linguistics Deborah Tannen in her book The Argument Culture, which “urges us to approach the world - and the people in it - in an adversarial frame of mind.” (1998, p. 1). It’s the reason that it’s so hard to have productive conversations today every conversation or opposing viewpoint feels contentious. The idea that someone has an opposing view to you is often enough to turn a conversation into a confrontation. This is a huge issue: approaching things with an adversarial frame of mind is a barrier to listening and understanding which means progress suffers as well. Issues are like a many sided crystal - there are an infinite number of ways of looking at them - but it is up to us, the arguers, to identify the frames of view that actually mean something. It’s no use pointing out that every issue has an infinite number of sides if people are incapable of identifying the ones that are actually important. While it’s a problem to approach every issue as only two sides, the right issues are quite black and white: it’s either for or against. Eric Liu (2016) wrote that Americans don’t need to argue less, they just need less frivolous arguments. Meaningful arguments are ones that are worth changing someone’s mind about, ones that can provide a greater benefit to people in general. Starbucks vs. Dunkin’ Donuts is an example of a frivolous argument - it doesn’t do 2 Comm-Entary 2020-2021 anyone any favors, it’s just arguing for the sake of arguing. But take an argument from recent days - whether or not to vaccinate out-of-state students in New Hampshire - this is a meaningful argument. The decision affects communities around college campuses all over New Hampshire and all the people within them. For this argument there’s no need to ponder about how many different points of view are at hand: it’s “do we let them get vaccinated or not?” Crowley and Hawhee (2014) wrote of Stasis Theory - a method through which people can properly set up for a meaningful argument. Stasis identifies the agreement to disagree. A topic that is in stasis is one that is important enough for there to be two clear sides to it: [whether or not to vaccinate out-of-state college students]. The steps taken after stasis is established are crucial to a meaningful argument - clarifying thinking, understanding the audience’s assumptions and values and looking towards proofs before the arguing is done ensures that the topic isn’t just fussing. Once some of these steps are out of the way, each side of the good argument can be formulated in a greater, more purposeful context. Pointing out this “argument culture” is the first step, but what role do young people - particularly students - play in the equation? Craig Rood wrote a pedagogy for the Duke University press called “Moves” toward Rhetorical Civility. These “moves,” as he labels them, are ideological frameworks that we should strive towards as humans to better understand each other and make more progress on issues. Some of these techniques may seem like common decency to some: “opening up,” “searching for sameness,” “examining differences,” and “listening deeply,” (2014, p. 400), but more often than not they’re left untouched in modern conversations. The time and place to put these practices of common conversational decency into practice is in and around a school setting. In the typical classroom, students can interact and collaborate, as well as encourage each other. The classroom acts as common ground for a pool of students that come from a number of different backgrounds and opinions. In this setting, everyone is equal as a student and conversations should be had with that premise. This ensures that those with opposing ideals can still come together and have conversations that lead to progress and understanding, not just speaking for the sake of it.

Load more