After browsing over quick reference guides, it became clear that your genre dictates how that information will be shared. All five of the QRG's that I explored to a different and tailored approach based on numerous aspects I will expand on shortly.
What do the conventions of this genre - the Quick Reference Guide - seem to be?
Most genres have particular elements that are conventional. Conventions help influence how we interpret the information that is being presented so based on the genre we will have different expectations and take-aways. The stem cell QRG is a science-based analysis of stem cells and therefore more visuals were necessary. The other four QRG's presented their information with more words, less images and a distinct format and design. Typically, the hard science info-graphs and texts are usually partnered with many figures and diagrams that complement the text. Reversely, other genres rely much more on text than images.
How are those conventions defined by the author's formatting and design choices?
As the main distributor and manager of their project, the author(s) know what convention best describe their genre and what their end goal is. Based off of this information, they are able to format and design in order to appeal to their intended audience and get their purpose across. For example, David Graham's "The 2016 U.S Presidential Race: A Cheat Sheet" is formatted much differently than the "Stem Cell Quick Reference." This is not a coincidence but rather a strategic tool. Individuals reading Graham's articles do not need a lump of presidential candidate photos or diagrams because that would not be very helpful to them. What the author is attempting to do is present the information is a very logical and organized manner so it is appealing to the intended audience. Similarly, "Stem Cell Quick Reference" would not be a fun read if all we had were sub-headers and short paragraphs of information. The conventions that have been established over time serve as a template for author's to use because each genre and piece of writing in a specific field doesn't usually transcend audiences.
What does the purpose of these QRG's seem to be?
The purpose of these QRG's seems to be to present information in a concise and engaging manner based on the intended audience.
Who is the intended audience for these different QRG's? Are they all intended for similar audiences? Or different? How and Why?
The intended audiences for each of the QRG's is very different and therefore the way the information is presented is directly affected. The Sochi Olympic Opening Ceremony piece is intended for an audience that appreciates information in many different formats (text, images, popular culture references). The information in this QRG walks you through questions the audience might have and answers to those questions. Essentially it serves as almost a conversation which in my opinion makes it an easy read. The QRG on Puerto Rico's debt crisis presents the information in a very specific style. All 11 facts are presented in an almost independent manner so if you were to skip from fact #1 to fact #5 you would not be at a complete loss. The topic of the debt crisis lends itself well to a number list because it incorporates important numbers figures as well as more traditional communication tools (interview quotes).
Overall, QRG's are a great way to present information that is easy to read, concise, visually-appealing and informative.
 |
| Example of a QRG that uses both images and figures. U.S Department of Agriculture Administration. "Childhood Hunger in America infograph." March 5, 2015 via Flickr. Public Domain. |
The information you presented on the intended audience changed the way I approached this. I initially presumed that the authors were creating the article for anybody interested in reading it but after reading your work, I am rethinking that. People are going to look at what you've written because it interests them for one reason or another. Tailoring what you're writing to assist with this only makes sense. For example, I wouldn't discuss a new breakthrough in electron microscopes using a QRF style out of People magazine, I'd tailor it to what the scientific community is used to seeing. Good work and thanks for insight!
ReplyDeleteHello Sayanna,
ReplyDeleteYour thoughts on the format and design being connected to the topic were very insightful. I never thought about it from that point of view, and instead just assumed the conventions of format were universal across the genre. I will go back and make sure that my format matches the content.
I like how you made the relations between the style of the headings with the topic at hand. It's something that I wouldn't have noticed off the bat, although it's fairly obvious looking back at it. I agree that there is a target audience for each QRG, which certainly allows the writer to have certain presentation styles, but I also believe that the basic information given within the QRG could still be tailored to the general public who may have heard of the issue and are seeking a quick read-up about the scenario.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed how you compared the conventions and formatting of the QRG based on what kind it was, scientific vs. informational and how they differed in appearance and use of text and images. Personally, I at first thought the audiences were all the same, but my opinion changed when reading your views on how the audiences can differ based on what kind of readers they are. I never took into account how the formatting, whether it be pictures vs. text, can drastically change the audience. Very nice evaluation
ReplyDelete