1

Aldo Giannattasio
Digital Rhetoric
Professor Ristow
1/24/18
Technoliteracy and Digital Rhetoric Response

When looking at the book The Medium is the Massage and Defining or Locating Digital
Rhetoric it is noticeable that the book and article revolve around the topic of rhetoric.
Rhetoric correlates with the notion of there being an art of not only persuasion but also
one of exploration within the text.
However when looking at technoliteracy it is seen that it is where there is
exploration of rhetoric’s within technology and also the idea of technology itself being a
form of rhetoric (p.24 DL). Along with that technoliteracy seems to focus on the way in
which texts are used within digital platforms and how they vary from traditional styles
such as classical rhetoric where things were written. On the other hand digital rhetoric
seems to be a much broader scope and focuses on what seems to be all the questions one
has within the field of digital media according to Dorwick. Therefore it is the application
of rhetorical theory to all digital texts and performances. When looking at technoliteracy
it sort of relates to medieval rhetoric in that it also primarily focuses of the style and in
particular the different stylistic elements. Through the first few pages one is able to notice
the usage of only a few words on the page along with being in different fonts and places.
That therefore displays the multiple styles that are used in order to catch and draw the
reader’s eye. Within the first few pages though we also see the usage of digital rhetoric
through the analyzing of imagery. The book incorporates imagery as a way to accompany
the writing and that then brings up the concept of looking at graphic designs and drawing
on the theory from art (p.5 M&M). The image of the fingerprint for example represents
how there are dramatic and rapid changes in digital media.
When looking at technoliteracy it seems to share the notion that “anybody now
can become both author and publisher. (P.12 M&M)” This then goes with the idea of
interactivity within digital rhetoric and how it allows for user to user interaction (p.16
DL). With technoliteracy we also see that it draws us to unconventional styles of writing.
Typically though when we think of rhetoric we envision the traditional style of writing as
opposed something unfamiliar (p.50 D&D). This then relates to digital rhetoric is seen to
 2

have coded differences rather than similarity and that then forces us to adapt (p.6 DL).
When looking at the spoken word it is seen that the spoken word was something that is
absorbed unconsciously. Electric information, however says there is no detachment or
systematically framing oneself outside we all exist inside and are observers (p.52
M&M).Technoliteracy therefore like digital rhetoric foster human knowledge and
memory and seduces the reader to have new ideas (p.12 DL). Therefore text is the
container for holding the arguments and persuasive discourse of someone and provides a
bridge between text and the desire to understand by forcing one to not be limited in what
one hears or sees. “Digital rhetoric occurs in the articulation of text as gizmo and as
spime. Text in the gizmo format represents a dramatic departure from text as product…”
(p.9 M&M).
Therefore we see the usage of text and imagery embodying one another (p.77
M&M). Through digital rhetoric one is not only being educated but also learning to think
(p.10 DL). An example of imagery embodying text is seen when talking about education
and learning. The image of circuit board for example represents how we are always
processing new information. Where there is a difference however, between the two is that
digital rhetoric looks at the space that is perceived and the idea of going of not what one
knows but rather what they are seeing (p. 57 M&M). Technoliteracy seems to harp more
on Ronald Barthe’s notion of individual text being the center of a network (p.11 DL).
However although Technoliteracy is a major point, digital rhetoric seems to focus on the
big picture as a whole instead of just one part of digital pieces.
When looking at media as a whole it is an extension of some human faculty and
that today any understanding of social or cultural change isn’t possible without
knowledge of media (p.25 M&M). “The dominant organ of sensory and social orientation
in pre-alphabet societies was the ear. The phonetic alphabet forced the magic world of the
ear to yield to the eye” (p.44 M&M). Digital rhetoric therefore is the culmination of
written and oral texts along with other mediums (p.23 DL). In the end rhetoric builds off
of the human environment and is not just as a teaching machine but can be seen as a so-
called work of art (p.68 M&M).


 3