Reflection Theory of Writing with regards with Rhetorical Situation, Audience, and Genre

To my eyes, the theory of writing primarily focuses on two things: The ability to convey emotions and feelings, and the ability to communicate ideas efficiently with one another. With regards with the communication of writing in that part of my personal theory of writing, it involves the context or the rhetorical situation behind a topic, the medium or genre in which the information is shared, and the audience that the information is meant for. Through composing my rhetorical analysis of genetically modified organisms (GMOs), I have learned on my own that the audience, the context of the rhetorical situation, and the genre in which in the author may wish to communicate his/her ideas in simultaneously influence each other. As a result, different pieces of writing are generated as a result of this.

Taking the controversy of GMOs as an example, there is a distinct miscommunication between the public who are fearful of GMOs, and the plethora of scientists who believe that there is no difference between the safety of consuming GMOs and their counterparts. As of right now, there are still a demand for eradicating the presence of GMOs in our food markets and agriculture. This demand was enhanced since the inception of GMOs. Many people were suspicious on the potential detrimental impacts of them on human health and they still do today. This is the audience’s response which can form the rhetorical situation. The rhetorical situation of the fears can influence the genres in which one might communicate their ideas as well. Some of these sources come in the form of news article on websites, or non-profit organizations on various social media platforms such as Instagram. Genres that can be accessible by the general public is what really matters. In addition, the ones that are effective in promoting the fear of GMOs in the public are ideally the ones that can be accessed by the majority of the public. This is evident in some sources that say that bio-agricultural companies such as Monsanto are evil corporations that are there to make artificial creatures that are meant to make profit than ensure their consumers with edible, safe foods. In return, it repeats the cycle again and the audience responds in a way in which the authors of their own published work can adjust. Then, they will compose more reports on GMOs in respect to the feedback they receive and the rhetorical situation that is being at hand. Overall, it is a cycle between the manipulation of genre, rhetorical situation, and the author’s target audience.

I believe it can also be argued that the rhetorical situation of the idea of GMOs transitioned into a huge controversy due to the fact one might present their information through a specific medium or genre to influence the audience into believing that GMOs are truly harmful to our health. As the response from the audience is obtained, the genres in which the author uses to communicate those ideas reuse the same medium to continually share their information. Again, it adds on to the context behind GMOs and its controversy. In conclusion, this what supports my perspective on how it seems that it is a never-ending cycle in which these 3 elements continually play each other. As a result, different pieces of writing along with contrasting point of views is produced.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.