Lane 1

Andrew Lane

Dr. Erin Dietel-McLaughlin

First Year Composition 13100

28 September 2010

The War of the Web

In many of life’s circumstances there are two distinct sides to an issue. In the last few

decades, digital technology has caused one of these two-sided debates. There may be no two

better representatives to dispute this argument than Andrew Keen, the author of “Web 2.0”, and

Theodora Stites, the author of “Someone to Watch Over Me”. Keen, a Silicon Valley

entrepreneur and digital media critic, is a conservative mind inspired to save the fleeting

professionalism that still remains in the media world. At fifty years old, he is a well-educated

man with a bachelor’s degree from the University of London, and a master’s degree from the

University of California-Berkeley. Keen, who made his money in the dot.com boom of the

nineties, is an elitist who believes people should learn by listening to experts like him. For

example, Keen may argue that the “dorm-room musician” should not have an equal opportunity

as the famous English band, “The Who”. Theodora Stites, however, embodies a different runner

in today’s digital media campaign. At age twenty-four, Stites is a young socialite who lives and

works in New York City doing market research. Stites, like so many of her peers, has been

consumed into a lifestyle of social networking sites, instant messaging, and online chatting. It is

a person like Stites, someone who embodies individualism and relies on constant personal

expression, which Keen would contest. Stites can see nothing wrong with giving society the

ability to operate an online blog, or website. Stites, unlike Keen, argues that the more social

networking sites there are, the better off society can be. The two authors make use of the three
 Lane 2

forms of rhetorical audience appeal in their discussions of technology. Despite imploring

opposing audiences, Keen and Stites are both able to convey instruments of rhetoric to their

readers effectively. Consequently, they both earn a place in the next edition of They Say/I Say.

Andrew Keen’s traditional use of pathos, ethos, and logos persuades his technologically

conservative audience to despise the democratizing of the web, and in turn, rebel from the Web

2.0 movement. In his first paragraph, Keen offers a story of Greek legend in order to foreshadow

his displeased mood. Keen states that unlike the ancient Greeks, modern society is apt to

seduction. It is here that Keen injects his first example of Pathos. In Keen’s thesis he states,

“From the French and Russian revolutions to the countercultural upheavals of the 60’s and the

digital revolution of the 90’s, we have been seduced, time after time and text after text, by the

vision of a political utopia”. Here, Keen demeans modern society, characterizing it as weak and

pathetic. Keen takes a shot at the emotions of modern day citizens, and in doing so, he provides

an example of pathos. It is clear that Keen is not happy with society giving into the seductions of

the web. This is shown, specifically with an old friend of Keen, once a fellow entrepreneur, who

is now working on a start-up technology that creates easy-to-use software tools for online

communities to publish weblog, digital movies, and music. In critiquing his friend’s new

socialized behavior, Keen reminds the reader, “This entrepreneur owns a $4 million house a few

blocks from Steve Job’s house. He vacations in the South Pacific. His children attend the most

exclusive private academy on the peninsula. But for all of this he sounds more like a cultural

Marxist, than a capitalist with an MBA from Stanford”. Keen is troubled and drowned in disgust

after he discovers his friend, an elitist, has turned toward the dark side of the digital technology

battle. Keen has a hard time understanding how his friend has come to be so liberal, while

vacating the highest status of society. By mocking his friend in this way, Keen inflicts and
 Lane 3

emotional response from his reader and effectively utilizes pathos. In other words, Keen touches

on the emotions of guilt and shame to express his concern to his reader. In doing so, Keen is

able to prevent his reader from making the same mistake that his friend did.

Keen’s illustration of ethos is followed shortly thereafter. As he begins to tell the reader

a story, Keen states, “I was treated to lunch at a fashionable Japanese restaurant in Palo Alto by a

serial Silicon Valley entrepreneur who, back in the dot.com boom, had invested in my start-up

Audiocafe.com”. Here, Keen establishes credibility with his audience, assuring them that he is

not merely an angry protester, but rather an experienced entrepreneur. In keeping with his elitist

character, Keen mentions that he was treated to lunch at a “fashionable” Japanese restaurant.

Also, with this bit of pathos, Keen assures his audience, a wealthy, conservative, elite

demographic, that he too, is one of them. Keen appeals to the rhetorical form of ethos by

proving to his reader that he is of the upper class of the white color demographic. By

distinguishing his character, Keen defines ethos. With his ethos used effectively, Keen now has

the support of his audience, and is able to continue into the depths of his essay.

Andrew Keen appeals to basic logic in his third form of audience appeal. Keen educates

the reader with the reasons for his anti-technology beliefs. Keen argues that technology only

provides a person with more of themselves, rather than furthering their knowledge of the world

around them. Keen says:

Another word for narcissism is ‘personalization.’ Web 2.0 technology personalizes

culture so that it reflects ourselves rather than the world around us. Blogs personalize

culture so that it reflects ourselves rather than the world around us. Blogs personalize

media content so that all we read are our own thoughts. Online stores personalize our

preferences, thus feeding back to us our own taste. Google personalizes searches so that
 Lane 4

all we see are advertisements for products and services we already use. Instead of

Mozart, Van Gogh, or Hitchcock, all we get with the Web 2.0 revolution is more of

ourselves.

Unlike when he applies pathos and ethos, which are made to affect the heart, Keen’s use of logos

targets the mind. Keen’s provision of examples from Google and online shopping sites are true,

making them strike the reader with a necessary impact. The reader, now, has a logical reason not

to endorse the Web 2.0 revolution, making Keen’s use of logos efficient. You may think that

here, Keen is making a mistake by being so adamant with this point because even those people

against democratizing the internet do not necessarily want to do give up online resources like

shopping or posting to a blog. Remember, however, that it is Keen’s exact audience, the elitists,

who believe that less educated members of society should learn from experts. Thus, the Mozart,

Van Gogh, and Hitchcock example would be particularly effective in establishing logos here.

Like Keen, Theodora Stites presents her audience with traditional examples of ethos and

logos. Unlike Keen, Stites presents an alternative and unusual example of pathos through out her

work. It is in this manner, however, that Stites is able to connect to her specific audience, and

make effective use of rhetoric. Much like Keen did, Stites immediately offers her reader an

example of ethos in order to define herself, and build herself a credible reputation. Stites opens

her writing by saying, “I’m 24 years old, have a good job, friends. But like many of my

generation, I consistently trade actual human contact for the more reliable emotional high of

smiles on Myspace, winks on Match.com and pokes on Facebook”. This quote is analyzed in

two parts. The first part, “I’m 24 years old, have a good job, friends,” is written by Stites as if to

say, “I’m a normal young women”. This normalcy is meant to prove to her reader that she has a

job and friends, and is not a low life. The second part of the quote is started at, “But…” This
 Lane 5

second part is also, in fact, “normal” because it is indeed considered normal for a twenty-four

year old girl to take part in social networking sites. In summary, it can be said that what Stites

says before “But” is normal in a traditional sense, whereas everything she says in her writing

after the “But” is also normal, but in a different way; in a twenty-first century, Web 2.0 kind of

way. Continuing with her audience appeal, Stites goes on to say, “I prefer a world cloaked in

virtual intimacy”. Stites defines herself to her audience, here, in this sentence. She has

established her character and can now go on into further descriptions of experiences on social

networking sites.

Stites offers logos so that her readers may relate logic to a universe of fantasy found on

the web. By remembering to back circumstance up with logic and reason, Stites and her

audience will never be barred from reality amongst their virtual worlds. While discussing the

importance of pictures and their correlation to the sites, Stites reminds her audience, “There are

hidden social codes in every image”. She then says, “Every profile is a carefully planned media-

campaign”. Here, Stites assures her audience that an outward appearance may, in fact have very

little meaning compared to a hidden social code. Every picture has a motive, and is not a simple

digital record. Another piece of logic that Stites talks about may be the most important one of all

to a social networking zealot. Stites talks about the near perfection of the online world. She

says, “No one is unattractive. But I’ve found that I act much as I do in real-life, and my

SecondLife relationships tend to fail the same way my real life relationships do. Virtual love is

still complicated”. Realizing that love, unlike a lot of things in the digital or real world, can

never be perfect is a valuable piece of logic. It is possible that one may suggest the effect Stites’

initial ethos, in the first paragraph, is slowly weakened as the reader becomes more concerned

with Stites’ sanity than with her story. It is important to remember, however, that as crazy as it
 Lane 6

may seem, Stites’ language and emotion is common in the social networking community. Rather

than worrying about Stites’ well being, the audience will relate to such instances with similar

feelings.

While Keen appeals to a traditional form of pathos, Stites’ pathos is derived from a

serious of confessions and questions. Stites’ style, of posing a question or confessing an issue is

new and refreshing. It is in this style, that Stites can be most effective. Her audience, a

demographic ranging from teenage boys and girls in High School to young men and women

starting their own jobs, is better suited reading an interactive text as opposed to a passive one.

Like Keen, Stites is one with her audience, and by posing questions and confessing insecurities

about her own digital life, Stites is forcing her reader to subconsciously, check his own emotions.

Stites poses the questions, “Am I hip enough for Nerve? Can I be a part of Geocoaching.com

without having a GPS? Are the people on Fak.com my kind of people?" Stites’ audience hears

the echo of their own ponderings when they read these questions. In elaborating on the number

of social networking sites that she belongs to, Stites goes on to say, “I need to belong to all of

them because each one enables me to connect to people with different levels of social intimacy”.

Here, once again Stites cuts deep into her audience with the power of the truth. The pathos that

Stites exhibits here is effective because the reader is able to relate to her need for “different

levels of social intimacy”, an in-depth prospective on social networking sites. Stites is able to

entice her audience with her vivid analysis of networking site issues. Stites is not afraid to let

her emotions show when she discusses getting ignored on instant messaging. She says,

“Sometimes they get smart, though, and click on the eye on the AIM Buddy List that makes

them ‘invisible’. It’s a much less aggressive move than simply not responding to a message”.

Stites’ choice to include this personal issue with her audience is yet another example of effective
 Lane 7

Pathos. Here, Stites has estimated that like her, her readers have also experienced a peer turning

“invisible” to them on instant messenger. One may argue that by including these negative

examples of pathos, Stites, a proponent of the democratized web, is being counter intuitive. It is,

however, important for Stites to include both the highs and lows of her love affair with social

networking sites. By failing to include her feelings on people turning “invisible”, for example,

Stites’ affection for instant messaging would seem superficial. Stites’ ability to discuss the lows

of social networking sites, along with the highs, makes “Someone to Watch Over Me” a credible

source.

Despite the differences in their readers, both Andrew Keen and Theodora Stites are able

to convey logos, pathos, and ethos effectively in their works, and consequently “Web 2.0” and

“Someone to Watch Over Me” gain entry into the next edition of They Say/ I Say. Keen

connects with the well educated, conservative man who believes that the democratizing of the

web will decrease societies propensity to learn. It is through Keen’s persuasive pathos, simple

logos, and well-fashioned ethos that he effectively uses the three audience appeals of rhetoric.

Stites connects to the liberal college student who illegally downloads music and updates her blog

five times a day. Stites’ stereotypical ethos, reasonable logos, and unorthodox pathos

demonstrate her effective use of the three audience appeals of rhetoric. A student who finds the

work of Keen and Stites in his textbook will learn the correct way to use ethos, logos, and

pathos.
 Lane 8

Works Cited

Keen, Andrew. "Web 2.0." Weekly Standard. The Weekly Standard, 15 Febuary 2006. Web. 29

Sep 2010.

<http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/714fjczq.asp>

Stites, Theodora. “Someone to Watch Over Me” The New York Times. The New York Times, 9

July 2006. Web. 29 Sep 2010.

<http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/09/fashion/sundaystyles/09love.html>