Mikaela Benny

Professor Ristow
WRRH 333
Critical Reading Response 1

In the age of technology many words and phrases have become more common such as
digital rhetoric and technoliteracy. From everything we have discussed in class, I have come to
define digital rhetoric as the bridge between any and all textual production, multimedia and
rhetoric using communication, persuasion and understanding. I define technoliteracy as a form of
written communication that is easily accessible to masses of people. I chose to define
technoliteracy with that definition because I believe there is a deeper meaning than what meets
the eye. If you were to look at the word technoliteracy, someone might take it at face value and
think it has something to do with technology and just reading and writing, but I think there is
more to it than something that simple.
Technoliteracy is directly related with digital rhetoric. As I defined technoliteracy with a
focus on communication that is accessible to a lot of people, that coincides with my definition of
digital rhetoric that incorporates communication through a lot of different forms. As these two
words do not have a set definition per se and are up for interpretation, to certain extents, it seems
as thought the two words are very close to the same thing. I do not think the terms are
interchangeable, but it makes sense to associate one with the other and to easily reference each
word because their meanings are so relevant in the digital age.
When most people think of technology they likely do not think of books or anything
electronic, but in regards to technoliteracy and digital rhetoric, both books and other forms of
technology are referenced and not just electronic forms of communication. In The Medium is the
Massage, Quentin Fiore and Marshall McLuhan write, “…print technology created the public,
electronic technology created the mass,” which shows how important all aspects mentioned
above are when it comes to defining technoliteracy. In the same text the authors also write, “All
media are extensions of some human faculty-psychic or physical,” which helps reiterate my
definition in which I connect media and technology and how it is more than just electronic. I
think it is also important for me to reference Silva Rhetoricae and how rhetoric is discussed in
“What is rhetoric?” because when the author writes, “how one says something conveys meaning
as much as what one says,” the author is placing an emphasis on the actual communication that is
occurring that takes place in terms of technoliteracy and digital rhetoric.

McLuhan, Marshall, Quentin Fiore, and Jerome Agel. The Medium is the Massage. Bantam
Books, 1967. New York.
Silva Rhetoricae, “What is rhetoric?” rhetoric.byu.edu