I'm a little bit frustrated with this read. I understand how hyperreading hypertexts is a valuable skill while reading online. The way in which hypertexts use tropes as a rhetorical strategy also makes sense, and I am intrigued by the fact that I have never thought of it in that way before, yet have spent a lot of time reading on the World Wide Web. The reason I find myself frustrated is because I am confused about how links conceal and reveal. Maybe I am just getting caught up on the words. With that said, here is my shot at explaining it. Links, "conceal as they reveal" (120 Burbles) in that the link reveals the rhetorical decision—the linked page—but at the same time is concealing possible rhetorical strategies that aren't explicit but are instead to be carefully considered like, "the dog that does not bark" (119). A good hyperreader explores the possibility that there is more being communicated than just the revelation of the link. At least that is what I gathered from Burbles.
Example #1 - Foxnews.com
This article is claiming that President Obama ordered secret reports on political unrest in Egypt this past summer. There are tons of hyperlink strewn about this article. One in particular stood out to me as a type of metaphor. At the end of the article the word "United", which precedes the word "States" is a link. What's funny is that it's linked to United Airlines and an Australian Petroleum company. Is there any correlation to President Obama? Not that I can figure out. If the link is clicked, it will take you to one of the websites mentioned. Now this is extremely far-fetched, and maybe not even worth chasing down, but I muse at the possibility that the petroleum linkage has an underlying meaning. If it were an article about George Bush then I would be more certain (ha!), but I'm not sure with Obama. Anwyay, this link, when thought about as information "concealed", it might be a possibility that Fox News is a sell out and is hyper-linking their posts to companies as a way to make money. A long shot, but maybe there is truth to it.
Example #2 - New York Times
This article is about Planned Parenthood funding feud, hence the title. What I found odd was the fact that there was a link to a Valentine's day page with roses and articles about the lovely Valentine's day. This link was placed on the word "Valentine's" which was one word out of the following sentence: In an e-mailed Valentine's appeal. This e-mail had nothing to do with the literal Valentines Day and its true meaning but was merely an e-mail written on Valentines day. An interesting connection? Yes. One reason for this link might be that the Valentine's Day page puts people in a happy mood when they're reading the article—or maybe that's a terrible assumption. This could be the revealed information.
That's all I've got.
Think about how links reveal like this:
ReplyDeleteBy linking you somewhere they are making a connection. Revealing how obvious it is that say a news database has a link to Fox News.
Links also conceal because on that same website, there may not also be a link to CNN. CNN's existence and importance becomes concealed.
Make sense?