This Barf Blog provides interesting insight into the process of bringing the food we eat in our daily lives “from farm to fork.” In addition to being available in French, English, and Spanish, making it obtainable to a much larger demographic and a wider group of people, the website is well organized and easy to read. This blog is a credible and easy to use as a result of its organization, producers, and citations as well as its length and wide audience.
The ethos is present throughout the entirety of the posts, all written and edited by Doctors Powell, Chapman, and Hubbell. Having the “evidence based opinions” written primarily by doctors reassures readers that the information will be credible and a citable reference. Included in the “About Us” section is an email for Dr. Powell, some form of a contact for any questions or concerns regarding the blog or its contained information.
Like all strong arguments, the posts continuously source various outside food safety hubs, including Food Safety Magazine, clips from the Colbert Report, and the Minnesota Department of Health. Sourcing these forms of media and government organizations allows readers to further explore the topic. Additionally it supports the claims made by Doctors Powell, Chapman, and Hubbell.
One of the first things I noticed about the blog was its organization. I could explore the site with ease and it was clear what the blog was about almost immediately. There was a clear section for donations, searches, archives, and contributors. Contributors have any credentials listed and areas for subscriptions and tags are easy to find. Having the info sheets available in 3 different languages makes the site available to millions of people. Categories ranging from allergies to restaurant inspection are divided and labeled, a must for positive reactions from readers. Few people want to spend more time looking for a section in a blog than reading it.
Clean- cut, informative, and organized are three adjectives I would use to describe this “Barf Blog”. It was enjoyable to read and anything I wanted to find was accessible to me and all other readers.
Like the blog I think you did a great job at presenting your argument really clearly so we can follow your line of thinking. I think its interesting how your main focus is the ethos. Personally I think that also reveals something about you -- which is always nice when reading a blog :) I do think you could work on your thesis to make it a bit more controversial, as I dont think many people will argue what makes the blog credible. I do think it is interesting how your focus of evaluation was even more specific by only evaluating if the blog was credible. I think its a different taste than most of us were doing and I personally handt even though of doing an evaluation like that. I had only thought about evaluating the barf blog as a blog in general. Loved to see another evaluation -- especially since you did it so well.
ReplyDelete"Clean cut, informative, and organized" I think your words for barf blog describe this post very well. I thought this was a thoughtful post and it was very clear what your criteria is within your post. When you are as specific as you were in this post, I can picture the blog perfectly and can relate and understand what you're talking about completely. The way you explained the organization of the blog was fascinating. I thought it really added a different piece that I never thought of before! Thorough evaluation, extremely well done. Look forward to reading more.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Emma and Karli: a clearly written, straightforward evaluation, Laura! For a blog review, this is a little dry--as we talked about in class with Nicole's, the stand-out blog reviews tend to have a lot of voice; also, watch some of the sentence-level stuff. For example, your thesis: "This blog is a credible and easy to use as a result of its organization, producers, and citations as well as its length and wide audience." It's solid (if not terribly controversial, as Emma pointed out), but the parallel structure is a little off--"as a result of its organization, producers, and citations"--notice that "producers" doesn't really fit the way the other two do (organization is a writing strategy; citations is a writing component, if not a strategy; but producers is just some people.) So maybe change it to be the "ethos of its producers?" or something, since highlighting one's ethos can be a strategy, too.
ReplyDeleteBut overall a sensible, clear review with plenty of detail.