Our first website we used was;
1. http://blogs.widescreenjournal.org/?p=245
1 1) 1) It analyzes the film Forrest Gump and how the history in the movie and the innocence of the main character contribute to the meaning of it as a whole.
2. 2)The audience of the website article is people who are interested in the history of America and those who want to analyze the film Forrest Gump on a deeper level. The tone of the article would be critical, the voice would be of a experience critic. An example that contritbutes to the crtical tone of the article is, “Most importantly, we don’t see any Vietnamese people in Vietnam.” The language used by the writer is very straightforward and simple so that it is understood by a wider audience.
3. 3)There is one graphic on the webpage, but it doesn’t relate at all to the subject of the article. In our opinion, there should be a graphic of the movie being analyzed and also a graphic that would contribute to the article. Because the graphic presented doesn’t really contribute at all to the article, we cannot deduce more information from the visual aspect of the webpage.
4. 4)We looked up the organization “Wide Screen Journal”, and learned that they are a peer review and open access film and video studies journal. This would mean that this journal is probably an expert in its field and should be considered a very credible source. From the sources they use to write their critique, four out of the five are credible sources from other journals and factsheets. One source on the other hand, is Wikipedia, which is not such a good one because of its inaccuracies. The journal doesn’t have a distinct bias presented and instead just provides an objective view of the movie.
5. 5)We feel that collecting sources from Internet was very effective because of the simplicity to find these sources. These sources will be very useful to us in the long run because it is very pertaining to our argument.
6. 6)We believe that looking at sources with a critical eye definitely helps in identifying the differences between popular and professional sites.
Our second website was;
http://www.fanpop.com/spots/forrest-gump
The audience is Forrest Gump fans. Clues are the name of website. It explicitly tells us the audience is fans of Forrest Gump. It also serves as a forum for Forrest Gump fans. The assumed knowledge is that the audience has seen and is a fan of the movie. The graphics mainly consist of pictures from the film and interviews with the actors. The graphics relate to the topic because they are almost all from the movie. They help to explain the content of the movie,and mostly stand alone. They did not overuse graphics to the point of distraction. The information on the site is very biased, but it’s not a advertisement trying to sell a product. It has credibility because it uses primary sources. The site Fanpop also hosts fan sites for many other movies. The website has lots of information for other movies as well. The organization is not involved in research and does not provide documentation. The website is up-front about its purpose. We learned that the movie’s popularity extends into different forms of media, such as the internet. The fans of this movie show support in many ways. The information is useful, but not as useful as the movie itself. If you acknowledge the bias in a document, you can remove yourself from the bias and remain objective.
No comments:
Post a Comment