Scrutinizing Dana Fleming's Article on Protecting College Social Network Users from Themselves

In an article written in the New England Journal of Higher Education, 2008 issue, by Dana Fleming, “Youthful Indiscretions: Should Colleges Protect Social Network Users from Themselves and Others?” Fleming poses the question of responsibility in monitoring students’ online social networking activities. Fleming’s purpose is to impress upon the readers the need for education institutions to state the guidelines and rules governing social networking, and “to treat them like any other university activity, subject to the school’s code of conduct and applicable state and federal laws” (443). She creates a dramatic tone in order to convey to her readers the idea that social networking can be sinister and their effects inescapable. Dana L. Fleming is a Boston area attorney who specializes in higher education law, with the mission of the New England Journal of Higher Education to engage and assist leaders in the assessment, development, and implementation of sound education practices and policies of regional significance. However, while Dana Fleming emphasizes the horror stories of social networking, she scatters her thoughts throughout this article springing from one idea to attempting to persuade her intended audience then juxtaposed stories about minors being hurt by poor social networking decisions contrasting the topic suggested in her title.

This specific article addresses the implications of “online social networking and how they transcend disciplinary actions and reputational harm” (442). Fleming begins her argument by paralleling the transformative properties of the invention of the telephone years ago to social networks today (440). Students’ online identities come at a price, allowing job recruiters, school administrators, ...

... middle of paper ...

...gle network (443.) Some schools use material from Myspace and Facebook in their judicial proceedings while others turn a blind eye to the site (442.) Through the ineffective use of rhetorical tools and the cognizant arrangement of this essay, Fleming fails to manage the distance between herself and the audience with the flow and fluency of the article. She also does not establish her credibility and portray her scholarly credit through her citations of literature and quotations from experts. Fleming also does not present the audience with two analogies enabling them to make logical conclusions.

Works Cited

Fleming, Dana L. “Youthful Indiscretions: Should Colleges Protect Social Network Users from Themselves and Others?” Writing Arguments A Rhetoric With Readings. Ramage, John D., John C. Bean, and June Johnson. New York: Pearson Longman, 2010. 440-43. Print.