Pranks are often thought of as interesting and joyous activities between friends. Usually the definition holds true among friends, where pranks are commonplace and not particularly remarkable most of the time. However, even within these social circles, pranks signify some concerning issues, such as power imbalance. Furthermore, the advent of new media exposes pranking to a wider audience than ever before. Particularly, video streaming sites such as Youtube allow for the widespread publication and broadcast of pranks between people, leading to various potentially dangerous and emotionally tormenting scenarios for those caught inside pranks. In Youtube pranking across cultures, Renee Hobbs and Silke Grafe discuss and analyze the issues which
…show more content…
Because of the lingering questions, mainstream readers require deliberations to properly engage their intellect about the issue at hand. Effectively, after providing proper context and background knowledge to mainstream readers, a convincing study should proffer a deliberation on the actual topic of interest. In Youtube pranking across cultures, the authors provide a long logical breakdown of how they come up with their conclusion that “Online pranking is alive and well on YouTube, as part of the dark side of participatory culture” (Hobbs, Grafe, 2015, p. 36). They deliberate deductively, first stating their conclusion in the introduction, and then specifically moving into sections such as inherent power struggles present in social systems that involve pranking (Hobbs, Grafe, 2015, p. 6), and finally restating their conclusion as a result of the premises. All of this allows for users to follow along with their internal logic and arrive at the same conclusions as the original. Resultantly, due to the logical deliberation that the authors provide, Youtube pranking across cultures effectively conveys the negativity and significance in association with pranking systems in society …show more content…
This is because, while a mainstream reader may see the logical flow of an argument and convince themselves of it, some might still question the authenticity of the facts upon which the argument predicates itself on. For example, a reader may believe in the logic through which a proposition put forward in an essay comes about. However, he or she may still doubt the legitimacy of the actual facts that the author uses to build the groundwork for the proof. To supplant this problem, authors of analytical papers must display statistics and sourcing in a proper fashion. Renee Hobbs and Silke Grafe incorporate this into the paper by providing external sourcing for most facts present in the study and incorporating a bibliography. Additionally, they provide primary sourcing and statistics from their own trials. For example, during their analysis of the depiction of pranking victims, Table 1 (Hobbs, Grafe, 2015, p. 25) lays out data in an attempt at transparency. Essentially, the presence of statistical backing and external sourcing ensures that Youtube pranking across cultures convincingly paints online pranking in a concerning light to mainstream
Because of the lingering questions, mainstream readers require deliberations to properly engage their intellect about the issue at hand. Effectively, after providing proper context and background knowledge to mainstream readers, a convincing study should proffer a deliberation on the actual topic of interest. In Youtube pranking across cultures, the authors provide a long logical breakdown of how they come up with their conclusion that “Online pranking is alive and well on YouTube, as part of the dark side of participatory culture” (Hobbs, Grafe, 2015, p. 36). They deliberate deductively, first stating their conclusion in the introduction, and then specifically moving into sections such as inherent power struggles present in social systems that involve pranking (Hobbs, Grafe, 2015, p. 6), and finally restating their conclusion as a result of the premises. All of this allows for users to follow along with their internal logic and arrive at the same conclusions as the original. Resultantly, due to the logical deliberation that the authors provide, Youtube pranking across cultures effectively conveys the negativity and significance in association with pranking systems in society …show more content…
This is because, while a mainstream reader may see the logical flow of an argument and convince themselves of it, some might still question the authenticity of the facts upon which the argument predicates itself on. For example, a reader may believe in the logic through which a proposition put forward in an essay comes about. However, he or she may still doubt the legitimacy of the actual facts that the author uses to build the groundwork for the proof. To supplant this problem, authors of analytical papers must display statistics and sourcing in a proper fashion. Renee Hobbs and Silke Grafe incorporate this into the paper by providing external sourcing for most facts present in the study and incorporating a bibliography. Additionally, they provide primary sourcing and statistics from their own trials. For example, during their analysis of the depiction of pranking victims, Table 1 (Hobbs, Grafe, 2015, p. 25) lays out data in an attempt at transparency. Essentially, the presence of statistical backing and external sourcing ensures that Youtube pranking across cultures convincingly paints online pranking in a concerning light to mainstream