Module 3

This week we focused on digital authorship: how writing online transforms not just the way we write, but who we are as writers. One idea that really stood out came from Sean Michael Morris, who wrote that “digital writing is action.” He explains that once something is written and shared online, it starts to move and evolve without the author’s control. Readers become part of the process, and authors don’t get to keep full control of what their words will mean or how they’ll be interpreted. That idea connects to Barthes’ Death of the Author, which basically argues that readers create meaning, not authors. It’s the audience’s job to interpret a text and digital writing makes that interaction even more visible. Blogs, for example, blur the line between writer and reader. In Adlington and Feez’s article, they explain how blog comments help shape future posts. In that way, readers actually co-author content. It made me think about how I’ve responded to online content before, and how my own blog for this class could be shaped by comments or questions from classmates.

We also revisited Aristotle’s rhetorical triangle, ethos, pathos, and logos, but this time in a digital context. Online, everything is an argument. The layout, font, images, and colors on a webpage all contribute to the message. Readers process visual elements quickly, so how a site is designed affects how the message is received. Digital writing also affects how we read. The UX Myths reading pointed out that most users don’t read everything, they skim. That means online writers need to break up content and make it easy to follow. As a reader, I’ve definitely found myself jumping from link to link or skimming sections to get the main point. That’s non-linear thinking in action, and Rheingold explains it’s actually reshaping the way we process information. Because of this, we need to be mindful of how we guide our readers through a post or website.

What I took away is that being a digital writer means being aware of your audience, your message, and how the space you write in shapes your writing. 

Collective intelligence, or how groups can become smarter when individuals share knowledge and skills to solve problems together. Rheingold’s Chapter 4 from Net Smart made me think differently about how online communities function. He explains that wikis are powerful because they’re built on collaboration, not authority. The more people contribute, the more accurate and useful the content becomes. One thing Rheingold stresses is that collective intelligence isn’t just about dumping facts into a shared space. It’s about thoughtful contributions. Understanding how people interact, look for subtle social cues, and then find where your knowledge can genuinely add value. That reminded me of Malone’s video on what makes groups more intelligent: social sensitivity, equal participation, and a good mix of perspectives. Those same traits also help online spaces thrive, whether it’s Wikipedia or a Discord server. The article by Hemstrom and Anders expanded this idea by focusing on research communities. These are groups formed entirely to explore and create new knowledge. What I liked was how they pointed out that even outside of traditional academia, people still form communities just to learn. I've seen that in online forums, niche subreddits, and even fan wikis people build huge knowledge bases together. Crowdsourcing is another powerful example. It shows how thousands of strangers can come together to create something bigger than themselves. Rheingold admits that Wikipedia isn’t perfect and it can be edited by anyone, so there’s always the chance for misinformation. But instead of dismissing it, he argues that we should be teaching students how to read it critically. That’s part of digital literacy, understanding how content is made, not just whether it's peer-reviewed.

What I took away from all this is that collective intelligence works best when we actively participate and share what we know. If we only consume content, we’re missing out on what makes online spaces so valuable. Even in this class, we’re building something together through our posts, replies, and shared understanding. The more we contribute, the more we grow.

Question to Consider:

How do you feel about the idea that blog readers are “co-authors”? 

Have you ever contributed to an online community? 

Citations:
Morris, S. M. (n.d.). Digital Writing is Action. Retrieved from https://www.seanmichaelmorris.com
Adlington, R., & Feez, S. (2019). Reading, writing and co-authorship in blogs. In Driscoll, D. L. & Powell, J. (Eds.), Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing (Vol. 2, pp. 8–21). https://wac.colostate.edu/books/writingspaces2/
Rheingold, H. (2012). Net Smart: How to thrive online. MIT PressRheingold, H. (2012). Net Smart: How to thrive online. MIT Press.

Hemstrom, M., & Anders, M. (2011). Creating, using and sharing information in research communities. In Driscoll, D. L. & Powell, J. (Eds.), Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing (Vol. 2, pp. 184–195). https://wac.colostate.edu/books/writingspaces2/