Zug Zug

The interview questions put into perspective what I learned in class so far. I like that there's a variety of questions to prompt my thinking. I'm proud of myself for improving and learning over the semester. I will take the vocabulary and concepts I learned with me in the future.

I'm happy that I embraced being "all over the place". I think for the first draft, I was too concerned with making it perfect. In the writing process, it's important to consider progress and not perfection. The first draft is there for you to make mistakes. I got a lot of valuable feedback during this phase.

What I liked the most was learning the different terminology. I think everyone on the Internet has a little bit of understanding of these concepts. It's just that not everybody has the word to describe them. If one of your followers said "I didn't read this because it's too long" then you know you have to change the format for the audience. You just might not immediately think of them as web writing concepts.

In the syllabus, it says that the 'perfect' post every time isn't possible. Like it isn't realistic that you will make the best content on every try. The web writing rules are there to help you get close to it. At least that's my understanding of it. Is there a way to tell if there's something 'wrong' with your content or you just got unlucky with the platform? Like if you have perfectly serviceable posts that people would enjoy but the algorithm didn't take it yet.

On my first draft, I had a lot of different aspects that I wanted to explore. Ultimately, I honed in one just a few factors to keep it focused and concise. If I had the many aspects like I originally wanted, it would too long of an analysis in the end. It was too much data. I moved certain sections around so it made more sense to the reader. I expanded on the background information to include necessary context and inform content analysis decisions. I used what data I had and created graphs because it made more sense as visual media. I expanded on my analysis by including discussion that pertained to my research question. These were the steps I took to revise my project. In the end, the feedback was helpful to sharpen my work.

I spoke about before how the feedback I received as similar. I reflected on how I need to write with more focus and less scope. It's okay if my first draft is all over the place. That's what a first draft is for. When it comes to the revision process, I know what I need to fix. I will keep this in mind to practice good revision on projects beyond this class.

As I mentioned before, I tend to go too broad in my writing. Feedback often includes a suggestion to be more focused. This focus is what I need to bring to my writing process. The overall product is better when it has a deep focus on *one* topic in particular. The paper is strained by too much information or too many topics. I will take this focus with me on future projects after college.

A lot of my drafts had similar feedback. I was often too broad or varied in my information. I had to focus and identity one topic to hone in on. After college, I will remember this feedback when I write for other projects. I tend to be too broad because I want to make sure I have all the information. I should stop worrying about this and instead focus on one thing.

I chose to do this as my research because I was curious if users enjoy the first-person (cat view) posts more. I suspect this to be the case. I think the audience might be a little parasocial. Therefore, they enjoy the cat personification more. It'd be okay to be proven wrong though.

I received feedback that my data needed to be more focused. I divided my data into quantitative and qualitative at first. I was focused on aspects like tone and word count. I got rid of those things based on the feedback. Now it's focused on just if voice correlates with engagement metrics. "Voice" refers to first-person (cat's perspective) or third-person (owner's perspective) for cat accounts on Instagram. The engagement metrics are likes and comments. I want to take number of followers into consideration too.

Okay so, I got feedback that I needed to focus on one aspect specifically. I'm doing my project on if a first-person or third-person tone increases engagement. It's about cat accounts on Instagram. So I'm taking note if the post is written from the cat or the owner's point of view. I want to make graphs for all the metrics of engagement (comments and likes). I will compare overall comments and likes from first-person (cat's view) compared to third-person (owner's view). I want to see if the personification of a cat makes users want to engage more.

My project is about how the content of cat posts correlates to engagement. I'm focusing on if the captions portray the personality of the cat, what tone are they, etc. I think I may be able to draw a conclusion about whether the caption is first or second-person. I personally think the first-person captions get more likes and comments. It's almost more personal in a way if it's seemingly from the perspective of a cute cat.

I'm wondering how to determine what content is relevant and what is not? I am doing a project on how the tone, structure, and voice correlates with engagement. What would the best data be to collect for this? I have qualitative data like if it's first-person, does it use emojis, etc. I also have quantitative data like the number of likes and comments. Is there anything else I need to include or disregard? This data is from each account.

My content strategy is to consider different factors. I think there's a myriad of things to consider. Sometimes I get too broad, so I have to think about what's relevant to my study. My content analysis is about cat accounts on Instagram. I had to filter it down to how the tone and structure of posts affected engagement. I want to find the best strategy for these posts, so I can use it for my own content.