The topic that really stuck out to me the most from this passage was the whole aspect of rhetorical velocity. While I was reading, I kept thinking of different ways that I can apply this knowledge to my campaign and how useful it would be to get more people to see the information I am trying to provide for them. Ridolfo and DeVoss were explaining the term rhetorical velocity as a way to get rhetoric circulated at a certain speed and direction. What I took from this was they were providing information on how to get your writing/ information out to the public as fast as possible by spreading it through as many different appropriate mediums in different directions to cover all sides of the field. In order to do this, they described a press release as an example. The people who composed the press release could broadcast it through television on news stations, news papers, websites, social media, etc. When they do this through all these different mediums, it allows the press release to reach a variety of types of people ranging from various age groups (older people tend to watch the news more and younger kids tend to browse social media more) to different financial background (some people can afford a newspaper and some can afford a phone to go on Facebook).
My idea for my groups campaign involved putting brochures in science buildings on Pitt’s campus to advertise for my groups information session on the CRISPR/Cas9 in order to circulate the information to different science students that may be interested in learning more about the topic. Also, this reading made me consider putting a post on Facebook or other various social media websites in order for people to have the ability to share my posts to make as many people aware of the session that would include a powerpoint on the gene editing tool as possible. Also, I was thinking for my second campaign piece I was going to make a flyer advertising the info session and put it all around campus. A good idea would be to put the flyers on every table in the library and cathedral like other clubs do to advertise their meetings and fundraisers. I would also put them on telephone polls as well in order to increase the rhetorical velocity to get my campaign out there for all those who are willing to listen.
Another topic Ridolfo and DeVoss talk about is “composing for strategic recomposition.” What I got from this was it was vital to create something that people would want to recreate and write about even further. I am not quite sure if this is correct, but I view it as if a news report went out about the election and it was so good, that other people wrote about what the original author wrote and expanded upon it giving their opinions and criticisms. A way that I can make my campaign similar to this is provide enough facts that people might want to include in a science project or even just write something like my campaign to convince others to care about the CRISPR. They may even find our groups presentation so fascinating that they post about it on their social media accounts.
Reading about the rhetorical velocity and the composing for strategic recomposition made me think a lot about my campaign and gave me some ideas on how to improve upon it.
“Composing for strategic recomposition” is an interesting tactic that I have never heard about before. I understand the idea of it but I do not know if I would always apply it to my writing. “Composing for strategic recomposition” is a plan that involves making sure that your writing is something that people would want to recreate or write about further. To me this means that your writing should make the reader think and form questions. These opinions that the reader has formed may cause them to want to explore the topic of your writing more to possibly argue or approve of your statements or it may cause the reader to create a piece of writing from another viewpoint with an opposing argument. I believe that the main goal of this strategy is to make people want to learn more and do some research about what you a writing about. The writer of this blog post mentioned that their campaign may make people want to write their own campaign. I believe that is a good goal for a writer to have but it may sometimes be very challenging. Inspiring a reader to the point where they actually go out and act on what they have learned is challenging to attain. Personally, I often read something and want to act on it or get involved in some way, but I quickly lose motivation. I believe that many people are the same way. So I guess this means that the main goal of public writing isn’t simply to inspire or promote thought, but to actually spark action and change.
I do agree with Ridolfo and DeVoss that rhetorical velocity should play a role in your writing. To reach the most amount of people and the quickest will be cost efficient and productive. I do wonder though if this is done in a very general manner it could perhaps attract the wrong audience. That is way it is is smart for your campaign piece to post the flyers specifically on Biology buildings because you would get the most interest initially from that biased sample. I do not know if your audience is college aged or science-educated if you do have a very specific audience like that perhaps the Facebook idea might not be as efficient as posting flyers on the bio buildings. It is very interesting that you mentioned “A way that I can make my campaign similar to this is provide enough facts that people might want to include in a science project or even just write something like my campaign to convince others to care about the CRISPR.” This helps me better understand why you will be distributing these letters and it seems now that targeting a specific audience with a science background to spread the word/ inform people through doing research for classes and asking questions about it in class.