Skip to toolbar

The two I chose to review were Digital Story: Urban Art vs. Vandalism and the blog post “Fake plastic unease: Can MLS become a world-class league on artificial turf?”

The Digital Story: Urban Art vs. Vandalism

Conceptual Core: The narrator is talking about the problem between Vandalism vs. Urban Art, she begins talking about how she learned about vandalism in her job in Italy. She said that the most amazing part was not the famous buildings and pieces of art she was seeing, she said that the most beautiful art was the art “on the street” which is considered vandalism in Italy. The clarity of this storytelling made it surprisingly easy to follow, although there were many facts and pictures throughout. She adds specific definitions of vandalism which make the reader contemplate what is and what isn’t art/vandalism.

Research Competence: I could tell that the narrator did her research before making this video. She gave a lot of different definitions, as I stated above, that helped the reader gain a better understanding of what she was trying to talk about. Also, she gave her own experience of her time in Italy working with the government on trying to stop and get rid of vandalism.

Creative Realization and Innovation: I think that a digital story was the best form of media she could have used for this. She included many different pictures of street art and then compared them to what vandalism is and it made it much easier for the audience to picture the differences between the two in their head. She also added music to the background which made it more enjoyable to watch than it would’ve been if we were just listening to her voice. The narrator would have a tough time trying to duplicate the effect of this video by just using paper

Relationship between form and content: I think that this was the best way possible to get her point across. The use of storytelling gave the readers a background in the history of street art and vandalism. Her personal experiences that were shared in the story were also a helpful addition to her video because they established her credibility in the subject.

Blog post “Fake plastic unease: Can MLS become a world-class league on artificial turf?” :

Conceptual Core: This blog post talks about the struggles the MLS has with its artificial turf fields and becoming a top-flight soccer league. The post compares leagues like The English Premiere league to the MLS and they are very similar in fan turn out and theatrics before the match, but the one place that the MLS differs from all other top leagues is that all the fields are played on artificial turf fields. The post grabs the attention of all soccer fans, such as myself, and those who are interested if the MLS will ever be taken as serious competition. This blog post is very clear and easy to follow making it easy to see why the MLS is not considered a top-flight soccer league just yet.

Research Competence: Throughout the blog post, the author includes facts about different leagues around the world and how they differ from the MLS. Mentioned in the blog were player surveys from players in the MLS on whether or not they would want to play on an artificial field. I think the facts added into the blog adds to its credibility, so it doesn’t sound like some angry MLS fan that is mad the MLS isn’t taken seriously.

Creative Realization and Innovation: Considering it is a blog post there is not anything too flashy, only one picture is used throughout. However, I think that the author of the post did a good job for what they were trying to accomplish. A video of a prematch introductions would have been a good way to be a bit more creative.

Relationship Between Form and Content: The author of the post was effective in their use of this blog. If it appealed to me, who doesn’t read many blogs, I think that any soccer fan or MLS lover would take interest in this post too. It provides adequate information on the MLS and leagues else where, and spotlights differences that make other leagues outside of the United States more desireable to play in.