There are three major changes that I would make to my creative synthesis project in order

to fulfill the targeted outcomes for this assignment. The first change addresses how I applied

“Return of the Author” to my main argument. In my original project, I made a vague connection

between author background and text interpretation. This is a weak connection to my main

argument that the presentation of information impacts culture, which can lead to harmful tunnel

vision. In my revision, I would expand on Busse’s claim that “The same images or events play

out quite differently depending on who is saying them and where, when, and to whom they are

being said. Ethos—the background, reputation, and identity of the author—is important and

affects reader responses.” This quote explicitly connects author ethos to the cultural

interpretation of the text, which is the focal point of my argument. The section of my text

beginning with “In ‘Return of the Author’, Busse connects…” and ending with “…then writing

isn’t diverse” would be replaced with this connection. This change to my project targets outcome

2 for three reasons. First, this new connection with Busse’s text better supports my main inquiry.

Secondly, there is a better understanding of where each text is practicing because the new claim

is explicitly connected to the main theme of my project. Finally, because this new connection is

overall more relevant, it better identifies similar patterns across the various texts I am using.

The second change to my project would be to include pins on the front of my jacket that

obviously connected to my argument. Currently, I believe that the pins are relevant, but they

require explanation as to why they aid my main claim. On the left hand side of my jacket, which

represents a lack of new information, I would remove the current “Nixon Now!” pin because it

does not clearly demonstrate tunnel vision. I would replace it with two different pins that I have

found on various online forums. The first new pin has the word “interested” crossed out, and the

second one simply states “your opinion is wrong”, with the word “wrong” in bolder letters. The
text on the right side of the jacket advocated for the exploration of new information, and I would

keep only the “be an infomaniac” pin because it most obviously relates to the main argument.

After removing the other two pins, I would add a patch that simply says “keep an open mindset”.

This strategic composition of the visual aspects of my project applied directly to Outcome 1,

because I am tailoring my rhetorical effects to the purpose of my project in two key ways. The

first is by choosing pins with written expressions that very clearly apply to my argument, and

therefore further my main claim. Secondly, using only two pins on either side of my jacker

reduces the appearance of clutter and is more visually appealing. My target audience is students

at the University of Washington, and one reason I chose this project is because it is likely to start

a conversation between students. This conversation is more likely to occur if the jacket is

engaging to look at, and ensuring the pins are visually appealing furthers this goal. Overall,

adjusting the pins on the front of the jacket results in a variety of composition methods that are

extremely relevant to the argument at hand.

The final revision to my project deals with the visual appeal of the text. Although white

paint was used to make the text stand out, the paint dried in a lighter fashion than I anticipated.

In addition, the text is small and is difficult to read unless one is very close to the material. With

more time, the first revision can be completed by adding a second layer of paint to the text. In

order to solve the second issue, the text needs to either be shortened or spread out over a larger

area. The only space left on the jacket is the sleeves, but because this would be difficult to read,

the only solution is to shorten the amount of text. The elaboration on “Recommended for You”

can be condensed into one sentence, stating “By basing movie recommendations off current

preferences, they argue that algorithms restrict new information and shape culture”. This way,

there is one sentence that introduces the text title and author, and one sentence connecting it to
my argument. When revising the connection to “Return of the Author”, this sentence structure

will also be followed. This reflection upon my project and subsequent revision reflects the

(re)thinking process outlined in outcome 4. I this change also targets outcome 4 by refining the

composition choices in order to achieve a specific outcome. The goal of this project is to inform

citizens about hidden processes that can change culture and result in a lack of new information.

In order to inform my target audience, University of Washington students, the text must be easy

to read and grab your attention. Adding a second coat of paint and making the text larger

accomplishes both of these goals.