Chapter 36 - Conflict

The last subject that I will be blogging about from chapter 36 is conflict. It still strikes me oddly that healthy communication can make conflict productive. It has to do with my upbringing and how conflict was imbedded in my mind as something negative. Maybe it has something to do with Kramarae’s muted group theory. I am a female and this theory states (Griffin, 2008), that women are a marginalized group and are kept on the margins of society through unjust communication practices” (p. 482). I have to say, my interaction with others reflects Collin’s standpoint theory, “any women who refuses to join into the discussion is cheating, especially if she really disagrees with what’s been said” (Griffin, 2008, p.482). I can see how this can create productive conflict because the other side is being addressed.

Chapter 36 - Expectation

Expectation found in chapter 36 is defined as, “In human interaction, our anticipation of how others will act or react toward us” (Griffin, 2008, pg. 476). There are several threads that are included in expectation. The expectancy theory which is, “what we anticipate will happen rather than what we desire” is the first thread mentioned (Griffin, 2008, pg. 476). Also mentioned are the interaction adaptation theory, social exchange theory, symbolic interactionism, uncertainty reduction theory, social information processing theory, and cultivation theory. I find it amazing that all of these theories have the common factor of expectation but as we learned about these theories we can see how they intertwine. The theory that I identify with the most is expectancy violations theory. I tend to anticipate how an interaction will occur instead of how I desire. If the interaction does not go as I anticipated it causes me to react even if it was how I would have desire the encounter.

Chapter 36 - Self-Image

I wanted to comment on the self-image section found in chapter 36. Griffin identifies self-image as, “Identity; a mental picture of who I see myself to be – greatly influenced by the way others respond to me”. The threads to this theory are symbolic interactionism, coordinated management of meaning, and cognitive dissonance. Also to address culture and identity there are the theories of face-negotiation, communication accommodation, and speech codes. There is a chart on page 484 that displays the threads of each theory and it really makes it easier to see the threads that integrate the theories. For instance, if you looked at the chart you would be able to determine that all six of the theories listed above fall under self-image. You should take a look, if you haven’t already.

The Muted Group Theory

The unfulfilled promise of the internet found in chapter 35 brought up points that I would not have thought of. The fact that all the early designers and users of the internet were male was a little disturbing, since I can remember the conception of the internet. The four common metaphors Kramarae points out regarding the internet is that gender equality and the muteness of women are not fulfilled. The metaphors consist of information superhighway, new frontier, democracy, and global community. Information superhighway is described as the earlier conception of the internet and how social and economic structures were not considered nor were they affordable to women. The new frontier refers to bullying for computer usage at a young age and that women sometimes will present themselves as men on the internet to avoid harassment. The privacy to state your own opinion on the internet is described as democracy, but anyone can post anything and this is where women are skeptical which something that they have learned over time. The global community was referred to as a place where likeminded women can communicate about topics all over the world.

Interview with Kramarae

The interview with Cheris Kramarae seemed different from the other interviews that Griffin has conducted. Maybe it was the setting and the dialogue seemed more engaging almost like a conversation instead of an interview. Kramarae defines Muted Group Theory as language that does not serve all speakers equally. The reflection about the two-culture gender hypothesis makes sense, Kramarae states, “it suggests that men and women often have different socialization, and so they have different kinds of experiences, and they learn to see the world in somewhat different ways”. I found it interesting that Kramarae referred to the term feminist as a term that would fit both male and female. At the end of the interview when Griffin asked if there was something that he had done as a male during the interview that she could reflect on, her response was positive and she made a very pertinent point. Kramarae replied, “….that’s all that any speaker wants from another speaker, another listener”.

Standpoint Theory

The Standpoint Theory of Sandra Harding and Julia Woods found in chapter 34 was really relevant to a conversation that I had with a few girlfriends. The fact that Harding and Woods focus on women as a marginalized group is something that my girlfriends and I agree on. We discussed the fact that society and culture differentiate males and females from the beginning starting with pink for girls and blue for boys. Girls are given dolls to play with and boys are given trucks. Girls are consoled when they cry and boys are told to not cry.

Harding and Wood point out that “women are not a monolithic group” (Griffin, 2009, p. 444). In other words we don’t necessarily take the same standpoint on issues. This is where the conversation with my girlfriends comes in. I happened to mention chivalry and how I appreciate a man who opens the door for me or takes my hand to guide me. The reaction I received was not what I expected. My friends said my view on chivalry was demeaning to women and views like that can take away what women have fought so hard for. I happen to not agree. In fact it is my opinion that society has made an impression that chivalry is becoming a stigma and men who demonstrate chivalry are addressed as weak. So I guess I would concur with Harding and Woods point that women are not a monolithic group.

The train/plane test

In chapter 29 the train/plane test was interesting. The German Public Opinion Research Center found a way to see if people are willing to speak out in favor of their own opinion. There were six factors that determined the likelihood of this happening. If the opinion is with the majority they will voice their opinion. The willingness to speak out depends on future trends. Those who share the same thoughts are willing to speak out. Those who remain silent have low-self esteem. Middle and Upper class along with young adults and males are more incline to speak out. Last, laws support those who express their opinions even if they are the minority.

As I continued to read the chapter and went over the critique, one of the flaws was that the train/plane test uses a hypothetical situation to measure the willingness to speak out. It has been suggested that they use observation methods instead of hypothetical situations. This makes sense. It would be interesting to see if the observation method proved the same six factors of likelihood to speak. I believe the factors would change.

Agenda - Setting Theory

With the presidential campaign so close to elections chapter 28 shed some insight to the mass media reporting of this campaign. The agenda-setting theory of McCombs and Shaw hypothesis is defined by Griffin (2009) as, “the mass media have the ability to transfer the salience of issues on their news agenda to the public agenda” (359). This morning on Good Morning America there was a segment on undecided voters and the impact the media has had on their subconscious. It was really interesting because the participants were asked if they though McCain was too old to run the country. They all stated “no” but when they took an online quiz and all of the participant’s scores demonstrated the word old and McCain were correlated. The same held true for Obama. When the participant’s were asked if they believe Obama has terrorist/Muslim ties they all replied “no” and again after the quiz there was a correlation between Obama, terrorist, and Muslim. There have been many stories about both of these issues regarding the candidates that the media has reported. After watching this segment on Good Morning America, I have to say that I am inclined to think that the media do present a picture in our head and we derive our opinions by these pictures. What do you think?

Interview with McCombs

The last comment McCombs made during his interview, “Most journalists are messenger-producers, they are not communicators”, was a real eye opener. I never thought of journalists in that way but once you think about it, it’s true. McCombs made several comments that I feel need to be mentioned. The agenda-setting function of the media had a catchy phrase, “the media don’t tell us what to think but they do tell us what to think about”. The first part of this phrase no longer holds true. There is now a second level to the agenda-setting function. The second level consists of what are the pictures because our attitude and opinion come from that picture. This is really important because the premise is that the media can influence how we think and sometimes what we do.

An Obstinate Audience

The obstinate audience caught my attention when reading this section in chapter 26. The section focused on the fact that the audience does not always interpret the ideology that the media presents. According to Griffin (2009), “there are three decoding options to obstinate audiences and they are as follows: operating inside the dominate code, applying a negotiable code, and substituting an oppositional code” (p. 342). The one that made the most sense is substituting an oppositional code. I am currently reading a book titled Muhajababes by Allegra Stratton. The book focuses on the very definition of this code, “the audience sees through the establishment bias in the media presentation and mounts an organized effort to demythologize the news. In Muhajababes the youth of Middle Eastern Countries are beginning to engage in a cultural identity of their own and are making efforts to produce their own media to counter that which is being viewed.

Digital Age

Earlier I mentioned that there were a few perspectives from chapter 24 that intrigued me. I blogged about the electronic age but I want to comment on the digital age as well. Griffin (2009) defines the digital age as, “A possible fifth era of specialized electronic tribes contentious over diverse beliefs and values” (p. 317). The text mentions how the electronic age is part of the digital age because it is the “power source”. The reliance on digital technology is becoming more abundant as time moves on and increasingly easier for members of society to have access. With that being said how reliant will we become on digital technology?

Some thoughts about the electronic age

Chapter 24 brought up a few perspectives that I would not have never considered. The one that caught my attention was from the electronic age. The first thing that intrigued me was the mention that sound and touch is more important than sight. It is some what true when you think about it. Books use the eyes and that is it. With the electronic age Griffin states, “Whereas the book extended the eye, electronic circuitry extends the central nervous system” (p. 317). This makes me think of neuroplasticity. I know this probably sounds foreign to most of you but I work in a nursing/biology department and we just discussed this. Neuroplasticity is the ability of the nervous system to adapt. You might have heard of a blind person whose sense of hearing increased as they went blind. This is the ability of the nerve cells to form a new connection to the neuron. Alright enough of the medical jargon, my point is that through out time of the different ages as we change how we communicate the neurons change as well. This might be why it is so difficult for some seniors want to experience electronic media. It’s something to think about.

Rational World Paradigm to a Narrative One

The rational-world paradigm to a narrative one which can be found in Chapter 23, is somewhat confusing to me. So I figured if I blogged about it, this might help me understand it better. Griffin (2009) defines rational-world paradigm as, “a scientific or philosophical approach to knowledge that assumes people are logical, making decisions on the basis of evidence and lines of argument. Fisher sees philosophical and technical discussion as scholars’ standard approach to knowledge” (p. 301). Griffin (2009) defines narrative paradigm as, “a theoretical framework that views narrative as the basis of all human communication” (p.302). The differences I see between these two paradigms are the rational-world people are rational and narrative people are storytellers. The rational-world people make decisions based on arguments and narrative they make decisions based on good reason. It is also important to note that fisher believed the rational-world paradigm is too limited. Another important thing to note is that the rational-world paradigm only experts are qualified to assess communication and the narrative is any one with common sense can assess communication. I guess that both paradigms would work for different research questions.

The Dramatistic Pentad

The Dramatistic Pentad is what stood out to me in chapter 22. The five crucial elements of human drama – act, scene, agent, agency, and purpose and the similarity of the writing practice who, what, where, when, why, and how made it easy for me to understand the concept of the elements of the pentad. These descriptions offer a way of determining why a speaker used a specific rhetorical strategy. The act is what was done, the scene represents where and when the act was done, the agent is the person who performed the act, the agency is the means used to perform the act, and the purpose is the goal of the act. I referred to these elements when watching the presidential debate. The act was the debate, the scene was Tuesday at Ohio State University, the agent was Obama or McCain, the agency as I saw it was media and the purpose or should I say goal of the act was to get the voters support. If you watched the debate let me know if you described the elements in the same way or if you interpreted them differently. I’d be interested to know.

Aristotle's theory of pathos

Aristotle’s theory of pathos, found in chapter 21, is intriguing. The fact that theory came about 2300 years ago is amazing. The theories consist of anger versus, mildness, love or friendship versus hatred, fear versus confidence, shame versus shamelessness, indignation versus pity, and admiration versus envy. When I read over the catalogue of opposite feelings, they are true to this day. For instance, love or friendship versus hatred is defined, “consistent with present-day research on attraction, Aristotle considered similarity the key to mutual warmth. The speaker should point out common goals, experiences, attitudes, and desires. In the absence of these positive forces, a common enemy can be used to create solidarity” (Griffin, 2009, p. 284). I experience this at work, at school, and life. The last sentence about common enemies used to create solidarity is so true at work. There have been numerous budget cuts yet they continue to hire administrative positions. The classified staff has found solidarity in our common enemy administrators.

Metaphor

In chapter 19 the section regarding metaphors made a lot of sense to me. I have used metaphors to help my son understand what I am trying to explain to him and it works. I didn’t realize that ethnographer’s widely used metaphors as a starting place for assessing meaning in the corporate culture. It is easier for me to understand as well. Griffin (2009) describes a metaphor, “Clarifies what is unknown or confusing by equating it with an image that’s more familiar or vivid” (p. 253). It makes sense to use a metaphor to describe features of a corporate culture. Describing the corporate culture using metaphor’s, that those you are communicating with can relate too, can assist in the process of the intended message being sent and the receiver comprehending the message in the way it was meant to be interpreted. They will get the big picture.

Strategy: overt managerial moves to extend control

While reading Chapter 20 I was taken back by what Deetz was implying. The ramification of managers/CEO’s wanting control. Money is the ultimate goal and people are second. The definition of managerialism found in strategy: overt managerial moves to extend control (Griffin 2008)is , a systematic logic, set of routine practices, and ideology that values control over all other concern (p. 265). This is what has caused the financial crisis we are experiencing right now. I have a very high FICO score and I cannot get a $1300 student loan in the private sector. Griffin (2008) states, “because of stock options and “golden parachutes,” top management has benefited more than any other group from the merger mania of the last two decades (p. 265). This is so true, I mean I cannot get a small student loan and the CEO of Wamu worked only three weeks and received a golden parachute of 19 million. Alright enough venting. This really does prove that Deetz’s critical theory of communication in organizations affects everyone. Big corporations have become the dominate force in society.

The symbolic interpretation of story

After reading chapter 19, Cultural Approach to Organizations of Geertz & Pacanowsky, the symbolic interpretation of story is something I have experienced at my own place of employment. There are three types of narrative; corporate, personal stories, and collegial stories.

An example of a corporate narrative from my place of employment would be that of our current President. At Christmas there is an annual EOP & S party for families of college students that our having hard times. A dinner is provided and gifts for the children. If enough funds are not raised to ensure a successful party he generously makes up for the amount needed out of his own pocket. They say that he donated over $2000 last year alone. The corporate story should represent company policy and the beliefs of management to go out into the community and help others that are less fortunate.

A personal story is from an employee who dispatches for campus police. The police codes she uses have not changed but the way they log in where their officers have changed. They have gone from paper to computer and still to this day she will write down an officer’s location. The computer system has crashed and her notes have helped an officer that was struck by a vehicle. The paper may sometimes be mightier than the computer. Hopefully you can tell that this is a story told by an employee about herself. “No”, it is not me.

A collegial story is that of an instructor, who will just not retire, well she has retired but she still works adjunct even though her husband is a judge and her daughter is an attorney. She definitely has enough income to live on. Everyone wonders why she doesn’t just leave because as an adjunct she serves only serves on committees and works on student success. She is never in her office and no one ever sees her with students. As you can see this is a negative personal account from a colleague.

Conversation with Randy Hirokawa

After listening to the conversation between Griffin and Hirokawa I believe I had a better grasp on Functional Perspective on Group Decision Making. It is really basic. As Hirokawa stated, “the theory is designed to explain why groups make good or bad decisions” (Griffin, 2008). There are four functions which we have all read about but I found it interesting that Hirokawa mentions that there is one function that is more important than the other. That function is evaluation of positive and negative characteristics, yet there is no hierarchal order for the functions as long as all are implemented in the group setting.

When Hirokawa was asked how he can tell when a decision is good his reply was quite interesting. The fact that good and bad is subjective and that it should be determined by those that are impacted is a belief that I share with Hirokawa. I found it very important that Hirokawa stated, “the theory has at this point not been developed to the point where it properly accounts for … social factors” (Griffin, 2008). This statement made the theory make more sense to me. I kept questioning why factors such as conflict or culture were not mentioned.

References

Griffin, E. (2008). A first look at communication theory. In Conversations video [Randy Hirokawa - Functional perspective on group decision making]. Retrieved October 1, 2008, from http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/0073385026/student_view0/conversations_video.html

Adaptive Structuration Theory

In chapter 18 Adaptive Structuration Theory of Marshall Scott Poole there is a part in the chapter that explains the use and abuse of rules and resources. The term appropriation which means the rules and resources used in a group setting have a history, they are used from another group. I just experienced this in a class where we had to form in groups. We don’t exactly know why we have formed in groups, obviously for a project but we don’t know what the project is. We had to write five norms for the group to follow. We have one member who is similar to the character of Josh in the text. From his guidance and experience with the professor we were able to agree on the five norms with a consensus. The irony of that one of our norms was that majority rules. Our group did this just like the example in the text. We will use the majority rules norm only if necessary. The one thing that Griffin writes that I did not consider when agreeing to this norm is if the majority rules norm is used it can create a strain in the group structure throughout our project, this would not be good.

Ethical Reflection: Habermas' Discourse Ethics

I found chapter 17 very interesting. The portion of the chapter called Ethical Reflection: Habermas’ Discourse Ethics discussed a very important variable in the functional perspective on group decision making. The fact that Habermas’s approach looks at culture in an after the fact manner discourages my belief of the group decision making perspective. Griffin (2008) states, “Habermas assumes that people within a given culture or community can pretty much agree on the good they want to accomplish, and overtime they’ve built up practical wisdom on how to achieve it” (p. 231). This statement seems true but the problem I see is when the verbal factor of communication in a group setting gets underway some cultures may not take the same venue in communicating.

I have experienced this first hand when I was co-chair of accreditation for student support services. We had weekly meetings and there were some members who would barely speak in the meetings. As co-chair I tried to encourage them to engage in the conversation because their ideas needed to be heard. I realize that their cultural background and upbringing were factors of their lack of participation. The only way that I could get them to engage is if I met with them one on one and directly asked them their opinion. I saw that it was hard for them to open up to me. The fact that I had to take them out of the group setting to communicate didn’t seem like we were functioning well as group. We did get the report done and I took with it experience and lessons that I will carry out throughout my career.

Communication = Content + Relationship

In chapter 13, The Interactional View of Paul Watzlawick, the part of the chapter that focused on content and relationship. This portion of the chapter popped out at me because I have been working on a paper focused on metacommunication. Griffin (2008) defines this term as, “communication about communication” (p. 172).

The chart on page 172 demonstrates the relationship between content and relationship. Griffin (2008) states, “Report, or content, is what is said. Command, or relationship, is how it’s said” (p. 172). An example would be when my husband states, “What were you thinking when you park across the street?” this would be the content. The relational view would be the remark implied a form of incompetence on my selection of parking spots. It was interpreted as a negative remark which in turn created a relationship message that was not effective.

Another example of content and relationship is verbal channel and nonverbal channel. Focusing on the same statement made my husband (verbal channel) had his hands in the air with his lips tight together and a frown from his brow. The nonverbal channel of communication assisted in the interpretation of the remark being negative.

References

Griffin, E. (2008). A First Look At Communication Theory. New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies.

Three Dialectics That Affect Relationships

In chapter 12 focusing on Baxter’s and Montgomery’s relational dialectics there are three dialectics that affect relationships. This caught my attention because it somewhat adds to Roger’s phenomenological approach, Berger’s uncertainty reduction theory, and Altman and Taylor’s social penetration theory (Griffin, 2008). The three dialectics are integration-separation, stability-change, and expression-nonexpression. There is a chart on page 157 that shows how these dialectics in internal and external conditions affect within the relationship and between the couple and community. It makes me think of a comment that Dr. Coopman wrote regarding my post on social penetration theory regarding personality structure. She commented that relationships are more complicated and referred to them as a puzzle. This completely makes sense to me now that I see how some the theories we have studied are only part of the entire picture.

Social Information Processing

In chapter 11 the theory of social information processing had an interesting aspect that caught my attention. It is referred as extended time – the crucial variable in CMC (computer-mediated communication). This is where Joseph Walther determined that it is the length of time the communication takes (typing the message) that allows CMC users to achieve the same level of intimacy as others do in person. I have a friend that I met online. She and I have become the best of friends yet we have never met in person. We met online through a business encounter and communicated for the past 2 years. I have to say that she probably knows more about me than some of my friends that I see every week. So I can see how the extended time can be equal to face to face relationships. I also want to mention the reduction of uncertainty with CMC. This might be why my online friend and I are such good friends and why I consider her a closer friend than most of the people I interact with in my social circle.

Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory (AUM)

In chapter 10 Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory (AUM) is discussed applying intercultural settings with some of the axioms and theorems of uncertainty reduction theory. Berger’s uncertainty reduction theory caused me to question if intercultural attributes were factored in. Griffin (2008) defines AUM theory as, “an intercultural theory that claims high levels of uncertainty and anxiety lead to greater misunderstanding when strangers don’t communicate mindfully” (p. 132). The text goes on to state the AUM theory differs in 5 different ways. They are anxiety, effective communication, multiple causes of anxiety/uncertainty, lower and upper thresholds for fear and doubt, and mindfulness.

Mindfulness is a term I have come across a lot in my studies. It makes sense that if you are open minded and don’t stereotype regarding gender, ethnicity, and/or other factors such as age. When being mindful it makes sense that anxiety and uncertainty will be reduced. But I have to say that Berger’s theory of uncertainty reduction also makes sense. It is like I am caught in between and couldn’t choose a theory if I had too. In my opinion Berger’s theory can be used to predict in western cultures and Gudykunst theory could be used to be an effective communicator in diverse environments.

Theorems of Uncertainty Reduction Theory

I found the axioms in chapter 10 quite interesting. They are all part of Berger’s Theorems of Uncertainty Reduction Theory. You can find this on page 128 -129. There is a chart labeled Figure 10-1, where you can determine the correlation of two axioms at intersection. For instance, axiom 3 (Information Seeking) and axiom 4 (Self-Disclosure) intersect at a minus sign. This means that as one increases the other will decrease. So I interpret this to mean if someone shows an increased interest (Information Seeking), that person tends to disclose (Self-Disclosure) very little about themselves. I can find that true if axiom 7 (Liking) doesn’t become a factor. If I reflect on my own life experience Self-Disclosure will increase if Liking increases and it shows that on the chart as being true. This chart really helped me understand the correlation between axioms of Berger's Theorems of Uncertainty Reduction Theory.

Personality Structure: A Multilayered Onion

Social Penetration Theory of Irwin Altman & Dalmas Taylor is defined as, “the process of developing deeper intimacy with another person through mutual self-disclosure and other forms of vulnerability” (Griffin, 2008, p. 114). The one aspect of this theory that caught my attention was Personality Structure: A Multilayered Onion. The example of the layers of an onion and how they represent the way we disclose personal information to those we encounter was an excellent example. This theory rings true to the experiences I have had throughout my life.

The personality structure is define as, “Onion-like layers of beliefs and feelings about self, others, and the world; deeper layers are more vulnerable, protected, and central to self-image” Griffin, 2008, p. 114). When I first meet someone I disclose very little about my beliefs, fears, goals, and preferences. As I get to know them I will share more information. So if you asked someone I just met to describe the type of person I am they would have a different description of me than say someone who has known me for several years.

References

Griffin, E. (2008). A First Look At Communication Theory. New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Concept of Community

As I was reading the concept on community, found in chapter 5, I came across the term generalized other. It is how we see ourselves perceived in social settings and attitudes of groups in social settings.

I volunteered as a grant writer for a neighborhood association for five years. During that time I encounter a lot of interaction with the community, which was under represented. I believe that at first I was perceived as an outsider who didn’t understand what they were going through. I perceived that there was a lot of animosity in the group. This made me feel out of place and in turn my attitude and actions when interacting with this group were effected.

It took some time for me to realize that my own perception of how they felt about me was wrong. They had many people come into the position I was in and did not have good results. So my misinterpretation of their attitude was misguided and it took some time for me to come to this conclusion.

7 Established Traditions of Communication Theory, Chapter 4

In this section of my blog I will be discussing one of the seven established traditions of communication theory presented by Robert Craig, University of Colorado Communications department. The tradition is called semiotics. Semiotics is defined as, “the study of verbal and nonverbal signs that can stand for something else, and how their interpretation impacts society” (Griffin, 2008, p.46).

An important aspect of semiotics is the name we assign to things that convey a symbol we then in turn interpret based on our own learned meaning. Let me try and give you an example to better understand what a symbol is. The giving of a red rose, a simple gesture, conveying a term of endearment usually interpreted as romantic in western cultures. The red rose is a symbol of romance. A purple Iris would not convey they same message.

Since we have such a diverse group I am interest to know if there any other representations of love or gestures of romance in your culture that are symbols. So please make a comment, I am curious to know.



References

Griffin, E. (2008). A First Look At Communication Theory. New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Symbolic Interaction (minding), Chapter 5

The concept that I will be discussing is minding. This comes from George Herbert Meads teaching and his student, Blumer’s third premise of Symbolic Interaction; thought. Minding is defined as, “an inner dialogue used to test alternatives, rehearse actions and anticipate reactions before responding self talk” (Griffin, 2008, p. 62).

The concept of minding is something that I have personally experience and that is why I find it so meaningful. I also believe that many of you have experienced this concept as well. How many times have you said something to someone or found yourself in an awkward situation where you pause to ask yourself the outcomes of different reactions to the situation, before you speak (inner dialogue)? I have done this quite a bit. It’s that point in the conversation where you go, ummm.

I came across a television ad that exemplified my interpretation of the concept minding and would classify this commercial as a great example of minding, one of the concepts of Symbolic Interactionism. It’s the newest Twix commercial and the conversation happens to focus on blogging, how ironic is that. If you haven’t seen the commercial click on the link:

http://www.bloggersblog.com/cgi-bin/bloggersblog.pl?bblog=726082 (Writers Write, Inc. 2008).

If the link doesn’t work please try to copy and paste.


Let me know what you think.


References

Griffin, E. (2008). A First Look At Communication Theory. New York, NY: The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Writers Write, Inc. (2008, July 26). Guy gets girl with blogging Twix commericial. Retrieved August 31, 2008, from http://www.bloggersblog.com/cgi-bin/bloggersblog.pl?bblog=726082

Introduction

Hi Everyone in Comm101,

I am excited to start the semester. I have taken several online courses and they seem to fit both my work schedule and learning style. This is however, the first time that I have had to blog and use a wiki for a class. It should be fun.

A little about me. I am married with an 11 year old son. We just adopted a kitten from the humane society and she is a handful. We named her Lola. My academic goal is to get a masters in communication and teach. I guess thats enought about me.

A comment about the reading. I started reading the first two chapters of the book and the one thing that I found interesting was the metaphors used to describe a theory. The one that caught my attention was from the Greek philospher Heraclites. you can find it on page 8 in the text, under relational process.

I am looking forward to a great semester with all of you.