Day Five – Prompt #5: Word Processing for Self-Reflection

As in every generation, the evolution in technology is constant whenever something becomes outdated and obsolete, requiring technology to be modified and allowed new functions and applications for new generations. In terms of word-processing, it is a basic function or knowledge where an individual or group of individuals communicate their thoughts and ideas by language (vocally or visually). With word-processing, recent generations relied on social network to express these thoughts and ideas by word-text. For example, the past generation used MySpace which later immigrated to Facebook to what is now considered to be the newest forms of such word-processed communication such as Twitter or Instagram. In time, Facebook will have its user population decline and be replaced by other social networks; below is a link to a recent study that observes such an event occurring now:

https://www.recode.net/2018/2/12/16998750/facebooks-teen-users-decline-instagram-snap-emarketer

A “bare-bones” text editor, is best suited for the technical user as it is used primarily in coding, the internal data of text. Specifically, the Sublime Text, it was the highly rated program on the reference link provided in the page. It allows those users to have greater degree of control and editing that is not as found in basic word-processors (like Microsoft Word).

Naturally, Microsoft Word has remained a constant tool that is versatile and reliable in many situations in the past and present. It works best with basic word-processing (with formatted text) for a variety of needs such as technical writing like educational purposes (essays for example) and creative writing (novel manuscripts for example). Its tools allow to better craft word-processing such as grammar or spell-checks that prevent common but easily missed errors.

Google Docs is a combination of word-processor with a spreadsheet application, allowing users to classify and arrange their documents in their desired format. This is useful for when users must record and hold onto important documents such as credentials or identification forms. It can also be used for presentations in the office setting with productive value and be converted into several types of file formats, enabling diversity among users and different software.

Scrivener is a word-processor and outliner (code-data) designed for authors, a management system that oversees documents as well as notes. It allows the user to organize notes, concepts, research and whole documents for easy access and reference. These functions are best suited for authors since it enables a greater sense of control and editing for long drafts of story-building. As a result, any writing that is word-processed by this program can be exported into standard word-processor or screenwriting software at a later time.

Wikipedia has its own uses by allowing users to the spread information through communication, using word-processing to develop its website and information for other users. With each user sharing their information, it utilizes self-reflection as a form of corrective procedure to complete the page of information. One of the difficulties with this, however, is that information can be corrupted or misused for other purposes with little to no validation on whether it is correct information based on evidence or not. (507)

4 thoughts on “Day Five – Prompt #5: Word Processing for Self-Reflection

  1. Vincent,

    Your linked article about the decline of Facebook with younger users was intriguing, as was your point about the progression of social media platforms (it reminded me a bit of Moretti’s examination of genre evolution).

    Your post touches on some interesting points, and I definitely agree with your assertion that technology is ever changing, though I take a somewhat more cynical approach. I often feel that it isn’t so much that things become ‘outdated and obsolete’ that spurs new technology, but rather that the tail is wagging the proverbial dog. As consumers, we are constantly being persuaded (directly or indirectly) to buy things that are newer, better, and/or faster. No doubt the truth is somewhere in the middle, but from an environmental standpoint, I do find it extremely problematic.

    Like you, however, I have ambivalent feelings towards Wikipedia. I still occasionally use it as a starting point for information, but I definitely question the veracity of the information. By the way, I’m intrigued by, but not sure that I fully understand your comment that “it utilizes self-reflection as a form of corrective procedure” – could you say more about that?

    1. I apologize for any confusion, what I was trying to imply was that “self-reflection” could be another way of reviewing one’s own understanding of the topic (or “self-correction”), then whatever is lacking or misinformed by that person’s knowledge could be corrected; Wikipedia is constantly reviewed and edited by others and their knowledge in that regard.
      For example, I’d imagine that someone who lived during the 1980’s could “self-reflect” and share their personal experience and knowledge, editing the “harlem shake” page as they know it for other users.

  2. Thanks for the explanation — I get it now. I can be dense and/or extremely literal at times! 🙂

    I find when I think about this type of “crowd-sourcing” of information, my brain starts to hurt…I end up falling down a philosophical rabbit-hole in terms of the ideological conflicts that can (and do) occur between contributors. On one hand, the underlying principle of Wikipedia is very liberatory — anyone can contribute, so it would seem that one centralized authority could not control what information is getting disseminated (I’m thinking in terms of the type of government sanctioned revisionist history that takes place, for example with textbooks in Japan when it comes to WWII). On the other hand, if everyone is contributing, how are we able to “trust” the information? Aren’t some accounts “truer” than others? Gah! Right back down the rabbit hole…

  3. So in your first paragraph, does your comparison to social media and Facebook imply that you’re predicting the “death” of Microsoft Word as well? Sticking with the analogy – it seems like people having been predicting the decline of Facebook for years, yet not until recently does it seem like Instagram is ready to take its place (though I’m definitely no expert on social media). At this moment, I don’t see a competitive alternative to Microsoft Word.

Leave a Reply to awd05611 Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *