“Conspiracy theorists burn 5G towers claiming link to virus” an article by Kelvin Chan, Beatrice Dupuy, and Arijeta Lajka addresses the social issue of misinformation and delusion. What they are talking about is of course the burning/destruction of the 5G cellular radio towers. The authors brought various information that details of how the misinformation of cell towers causing cancer and other health risks were brought to the world and changed ever so slightly with cell towers now able to spread virus instead on Facebook. This gets picked up by many delusional people and groups some including the anti-vaccine group. Then they started addressing this “false” problem to people and demanded to take the cell towers down. This quickly gets rejected which only made those delusional people take matters into their own hands by burning the cell towers down. The problem here is how can they know what cell towers are 5G? And so, many regular cell towers were burnt down which made communication by phone through countries and cities become useless, this made immediate calls for help unavailable. This however not only affected the nation but also the workers who are building the cell towers to get attacked.
The targetted audience is everyone including the conspiracy theorists, they hope to make the information known that 5G towers don’t spread viruses and this is backed by the top of the health organizations. The purpose is to inform the public about how and why the cell towers being destroyed and are causing problems everywhere. The genre is an informational news web site. The authors all very much want the public to know that there is no correlation between 5G towers and the virus outbreak. I know this because of how many times they have included information from knowledgable people that says there is no correlation between them and basically mentions how anyone that believes otherwise is wrong and possibly dumb.

Source:
https://apnews.com/4ac3679b6f39e8bd2561c1c8eeafd855

Hi, my name is Richard Hsu and my intended major is architecture, my preferred pronouns are he/him.

After reviewing the syllabus I believe I am most excited about engaging in a collaborative writing process with others and just improve overall in my writing skills. I am however kind of nervous regarding this course in being able to explore and analyze different genres and rhetorical situations since I am just bad in recognizing such things in texts, perhaps it’s just because English isn’t my first language.

I think the qualities of good writing will include the use of various vocabularies but aren’t too complicated and appear often enough that people will need to literally use a dictionary to keep reading. Good writing also includes smooth transitions and the use of various rhetorical devices that have the ability to give off the feeling that the writer wants to convey to the readers. While I believe good writing should include all those mentioned before I also think that it should be very clear at the points it’s making across to anyone reading it. This is the most important part of what makes good writing because to me if it is not clear on its ideas than it is just a paper with tons of vocabulary with no meaning. To be able to write well is to be able to convey your thoughts and/or feelings to the readers. I can only guess that in order to be a good writer you would have to be a good reader.

The easiest part of writing for me is to simply write down my own thoughts and idea as if to have a conversation with another person on paper.

The hardest part of writing for me is to be able to use or identify different rhetorical strategies or to analyze tough writings with a lot of vocabulary that isn’t often used normally. I’ll definitely have to work on my vocabulary knowledge.

In my architecture major, I will probably have to write reports and descriptions of various projects to people. Being an effective writer while not extremely helpful I believe can help increase my communication skills, perhaps it will help convey my messages clearer and seem more professionally made.