Extending Ethos in Digital Rhetorics
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Utah State University DigitalCommons@USU All Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies 8-2020 Extending Ethos in Digital Rhetorics Andrew J. Hillen Utah State University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd Part of the Communication Technology and New Media Commons, Social Media Commons, and the Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons Recommended Citation Hillen, Andrew J., "Extending Ethos in Digital Rhetorics" (2020). All Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 7885. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/etd/7885 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies at DigitalCommons@USU. It has been accepted for inclusion in All Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@USU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. EXTENDING ETHOS IN DIGITAL RHETORICS by Andrew J. Hillen A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in Technical Communication and Rhetoric Approved: ______________________ ____________________ Keith Grant-Davie, Ph.D. Jared Colton, Ph.D. Major Professor Committee Member ______________________ ____________________ Rebecca Walton, Ph.D. Lynne McNeill, Ph.D. Committee Member Committee Member ______________________ ____________________ Erica Holberg, Ph.D. Richard S. Inouye, Ph.D. Committee Member Vice Provost for Graduate Studies UTAH STATE UNIVERSITY Logan, Utah 2020 ii Copyright © Andrew J. Hillen 2020 All Rights Reserved ABSTRACT Extending Ethos in Digital Rhetorics by Andrew J. Hillen, Ph.D. Utah State University, 2020 Major Professor: Dr. Keith Grant-Davie Program: Technical Communication and Rhetoric This dissertation investigated instantiations of the rhetorical concept of ethos on the social media platform Twitter. It was a mixed methods study, combining critical analysis of example tweets selected through iterative sampling with corpus analysis on six separate corpora of Twitter posts. This project concluded that the affordances and constraints of the Twitter platform placed increased emphasis on the minute textual choices of Twitter users in their construction of ethos. Diction choices and invocations of other figures served to communicate values and group membership. Demonstrations of memetic fluency acted as an appeal to a distinct type of ethos, which operated separately from current polarization trends. Together these findings demonstrate the flexibility of the Aristotelian term ethos to encompass both traditional, static interpretations of the concept as well as the fluid and kairotic nature of digital contexts. (224 pages) iv PUBLIC ABSTRACT Extending Ethos in Digital Rhetorics Andrew J. Hillen This dissertation researched the concept of ethos, or appeal to authority or trust, on the social media platform, Twitter. Looking at collections of tweets, I found that the characteristics of the Twitter platform, as well as the general qualities of writing online, pushed users to use short cuts to trust, such as focusing in on specific buzz words, or through referencing well known organizations and individuals. Users also used internet culture as its own source of authority. They demonstrated that they were up to date on the latest trends and memes, and so were trustworthy accounts to follow. Users appealed to ethos this way because Twitter conversations occurred faster and farther, and with people who most users were either unfamiliar with or who were completely anonymous. Essentially, Twitter user rely on the short cuts to trust and authority in conversations because they are less often engaging with a stable, known audience. Twitter users must continually reassert and define themselves again as their posts circulate widely across and beyond the platform. v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Keith Grant-Davie for the considerable feedback, encouragement, and guidance during my time at USU. Many thanks are also owed to my first reader Jared Colton who read this project in many iterations and provided such important feedback. Boundless gratitude to my committee, especially Rebecca Walton, Lynne McNeill, and Erica Holberg who have offered sound and thoughtful guidance as I’ve worked on this project. Together, the faculty and my fellow students in the rhetoric and technical communication program at USU made this work possible. I would especially like to thank the twitter users who engage in ethos construction millions of times a day. Andrew J. Hillen vi CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ...................................................................................................................... iii PUBLIC ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................................................................v LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ ix LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................x CHAPTER ONE: EVER-CHANGING ETHOS: PUBLIC OR PRIVATE, FROM ANCIENT ATHENS TO SOCIAL MEDIA ...................................................................................1 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................... 1 II. DIGITAL RHETORICS AND ETHOS ..............................................................6 III. DIGITAL ETHOS IN PEDAOGY ..................................................................10 IV. APPEALING TO ETHOS ON TWITTER......................................................12 Example 1: Sidner ...........................................................................................14 Example 2: Kovalic ........................................................................................16 V. PROJECT OVERVIEW ...................................................................................21 TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................................25 I. OVERVIEW AND INTRODUCTION ............................................................. 25 II. COMPLAINTS ON THE DEPTH OF ETHOS ................................................27 III. REPRESENTATIONS OF ETHOS IN COMPOSITION TEXTBOOKS ......29 IV. ETHOS IN HISTORY: EARLY DEFINITIONS AND LINEAGE OF THE TERM .............................................................................................................39 Alternatives to Aristotle ..................................................................................40 Aristotle ..........................................................................................................41 Roman Traditions ...........................................................................................45 Further Divergence from Aristotle: Late Antiquity to the Enlightenment .....49 20th Century Thinkers and Rhetoric in the Modern University ......................52 Ethos through Western History ......................................................................53 V. MODERN SCHOLARSHIP ON ETHOS: TRADITIONALIST, FEMINIST, AND MATERIALIST ....................................................................................54 Traditional Approaches to Ethos ....................................................................55 Feminist Approaches to Ethos ........................................................................58 Materialist Approaches to Ethos .....................................................................62 VI. ETHOS FRAMEWORK FOR THIS DISSERTATION .................................65 vii THREE: METHODS .........................................................................................................68 I. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 68 II. RESEARCH GOALS AND QUESTIONS .......................................................68 III. METHODS .....................................................................................................72 IV. DATA COLLECTION ...................................................................................74 V. CORPUS ANALYSIS .....................................................................................76 VI. METHODOLOGICAL FRAME ....................................................................78 Methodological Context: Rhetoric and Technical Communication ...............78 My Methodological Commitments and Self-Disclosure .....................................80 VII. THE ETHICS OF TWITTER DATA COLLECTION AND USE IN RESEARCH ...................................................................................................82 VIII. INTERPRETATION AND TOOL FUNCTIONALITY .............................84 FOUR: DICTION CHOICES: ETHOS DWELLING IN A SINGLE WORD .......................................................................................................... 87 I. INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................87 II. THE CLASH OF TRADITIONAL AND DIGITAL APPEALS TO ETHOS .90 @NOAHPINION’S ETHOS ..........................................................................91 @E_PE_ME_RI’S APPEAL TO ETHOS ...........................................................95 III. BIG DATA ANALYSIS ..................................................................................97 POC AND BIPOC ........................................................................................100