Essay 27 - Who "Owns" Electronic Texts?

Who “Owns” Electronic Texts? By Tharon W. Howard

In 1996, if you violated someone’s copyright you could be sued in civil court. Today, because of the “Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998” you may face up to a $500,000 fine or five years’ imprisonment for your first offense. Sonny Bono’s “Copyright Term Extension Act” in 1998 extended the length of an author’s copyright another twenty years and copyright is granted for seventy years after the death of an author and, in the case of “works for hire,” ninety-five years from publication or 120 years from creation.

Today, corporations like Disney, MGM, and A&M Records can force the public to pay for images of Mickey Mouse, video clips of King Kong, songs like “Happy Birthday,” and other cultural icons for up to 120 years. Remember the lawsuit against Napster in 2000? Lawsuits are continuing to define the limits of the peer-to-peer technologies and copyright laws.

Most writers, including practicing professionals and teachers don’t consider the issue of intellectual property as particularly problematic. Writers today do expect some sort of remuneration for their writing and control over how their texts will be used.

Recent trends toward more collaborative writing projects in the workplace, along with the use of online computer conferences, electronic discussion groups, hypertexts, multimedia presentations, groupware, and other computer technologies aimed at enhancing and promoting collaboration, are all seriously challenging the popular, romantic view that an author owns his or her text. With an increase of reliance of computers in the workplace, writers are finding themselves confronted with intellectual property and copyright issues.
Five scenarios were given with questions about workplace issues.

Scenario 1
While working for a large corporation in the document design department, which prides itself with producing dramatic covers for the company’s annual reports, your co-worker finds a photo that would be perfect for the cover. With a little cutting, pasting and a few other modifications the photo will work. The photo is famous and since only part of the photo is going to be used and the image will be modified and essentially new should you go ahead and scan it? Or do you first have to have permission from the magazine which first reproduced it, the publishing house which sells reproductions of it, or the photographer who originally took the photograph?

Scenario 2
You’ve just been hired by a desktop publishing company and have received a new computer with software that isn’t compatible with other employees’ software. Your boss tells to load your computer with the old software that the office has because they have already purchased the disks. Should you go ahead and copy the software since the office has already paid for it?


Scenario 3
You’re doing research on an article about usability testing for Technical Communication and, as part of your research you join an online discussion group where others are doing human-factors research exchange e-mail messages about their works-in-progress. Someone posts an e-mail that changes your way of thinking about your own thesis. These are unpublished results and you want to quote from the e-mail message in your article.

Can you legally and ethically quote from an e-mail message? Are you obligated to cite the message since it has had such a profound impact on your own thinking? If so, does anyone own the copyright on the message? Do you need to seek the author’s permission? Or, since the message was electronically published by an electronic discussion group, do you need to have the permission of the person(s) who created and operate the discussion group or the university or company which owns the computer that hosts the group?

Scenario 4
You work for a large corporation that uses e-mail throughout the company in lieu of paper correspondence. You have been keeping correspondence with another co-worker, who happens to be of the opposite sex, and keep this correspondence to breaks and lunch periods so that it does not interfere with business hours. Your supervisor is aware of this and agrees with the situation. However, you have found out that your e-mails have been monitored and the butt of jokes. You are furious and you report this to your supervisor. Your supervisor tells you that the company owns the computers and therefore, has the right to monitor their use.

Can you stop this monitoring of your e-mail? Who actually owns the messages you’ve been sending? Do you, as the author, own the messages? Does the addressee who received them? Or does the owner of the system on which the messages were produced? What rights does ownership of the messages entail?

Scenario 5
You are a placement director at a large university in the professional writing program. To help graduates find information about companies that hire writer you set up a HyperCard stack which allows students to click on a state on the U.S. map. This stack is located on computers at the university and from a book which provides an alphabetical list of national corporation, you select data on companies which you think might routinely hire technical writers. The hypertext is so popular that several publishers learn about it and want to publish it.

Can you publish your hypertext? Have you infringed on any copyrights by providing your students with your hypertext in the first place? If you can publish your text, are you legally obligated to pay any royalties to your university or to the publisher or author of the book from which you selected your data?

To understand the problems of ownership in the electronic workplace Howard offers a brief historical examination of the origins of U.S. copyright law. He explores why electronic publishing, electronic discussion groups, computer conferences, and other new information technologies represent such a challenge to current copyright law. A historical examination of the printing press will show that then, as now, the introduction of new technologies challenged existing systems for owning and controlling texts. The examination will show current copyright law reflects an interesting struggle among at least three historically distinct and competing theories of textual ownership. First, of course, the romantic and commonplace notion that authors have a “natural right” to the fruits of their intellectual labors. Second, there is the assertion that the public has a right to all knowledge since “Laws of Nature” and absolute truths cannot be the property of any one individual. And third, there is the view that all knowledge is socially constructed, that a text is a product of the community the writer inhabits, and that the text must therefore be communal, rather than individual, property.

A Historical Overview
Copyright can be defined as the “right to reproduce copies of a particular text” (400). It was not and still is not a “natural unlimited property right” (Beard). It is a limited privilege granted by the state, in that the government gives writers the license to “operate” texts in the public domain.

In the 15th and 16th centuries, before the invention of the printing press, the creation of books depended on the patronage of the Church or the Crown, who then were able to control the kinds of texts both produced and consumed. The printing press led to a radical reduction in production costs, but the limited number of popular and lucrative texts available for publication increased competition. This led to the creation of the Stationers’ Company, which was a voluntarily enforced form of copyright. Thus, the Church and Crown lost their control over the production and consumption of texts, which in turn led to the creation of “subversive” texts.

In 1566 Mary Tudor and Philip of Spain granted the Stationers a royal charter, and it became a firmly established principle that a copyright is not the natural, unlimited, or absolute property of any individual or company. It made it clear that to own a copyright is essentially to own limited license or privilege granted by the state to promote intellectual activities deemed by the government to be in the best interest of the state and its citizens.

In 1709 Parliament’s Statute of Anne provided the basis for Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, which recognizes the rights of authors.
Major Principles of U.S. Copyright Law “Copyright law in the U.S. recognizes that in order to encourage authors to produce the texts which will lead to the artistic, scientific, and technological discoveries that drive business and industry, it is essential that authors be allowed to realize a profit from their texts” (402). Copyright law does not give authors and publishers the legal right to prevent the public from “fair use” of texts, according to Statute 17, Section 107 of the U.S. Code. It grants the public a right to copy a work “for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research” (402).
Factors to be considered to determine if the use of a work is fair include:
• The purpose and character of the use (is it of a commercial nature or for nonprofit educational purposes?)
• The nature of the copyrighted work
• The portion used in relation to the whole work, both in amount and substantiality
• The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the work (17 U.S. Code, Sec. 107) (403)
Only the tangible expression of ideas belongs to the copyright holder, not the ideas themselves.
Copyrights in the Electronic Environment

Actual legal status of textual ownership does not match commonly held beliefs about
the copyright and “who own what” question. Authors own the text rights after text is produced and they are protected by copyright law with limited privileges granted by the State.

The professional communication fields in general and technical writers in particular need to understand the general principles of current copyright law. In addition it’s important to realize that some copyright principles do not always apply to electronic texts. Many professional writers are aware of “fair use” principle, and protection of form of expression but are unsure about copyright laws for particular electronic documents “since technological changes have historically, represented challenges for existing forms of copy protection” (Howard, 1996, p.404).

Nature of copyright laws makes it difficult to say if certain situation is or is not copyright infringement. However, copyright principles can serve as guidelines for professional communicators when dealing with copyright questions. For that let’s return to scenarios presented at the beginning of the chapter.

Scenario 1
Central Questions presented earlier were (1) does such a reproduction fall under the doctrine of fair use and (2) who owns the copyright on the image?
Answer: This case is not a case of ‘fair use” of the original work because reproduction is not being made and used for educational, news reporting, or critical purposes. Even thou original image was manipulated, it’s still be “legally considered a derivation of an original work”. The member of the documents design team should receive permission before reproducing and manipulating the photograph. He/she should contact publishing house which owns the copyright of the original rather than using the magazine’s reproduction.

Scenario 2
Central Question presented earlier was (1) should technical writer go ahead and copy the software since office has paid for the software?

Answer: There is twofold answer in this case:
A. If company has only limited license to copy (usually for purpose of creating backup copies during installation process) the program, copying the software would be a violation of the law. It’s a good idea to check exact terms of licensing agreement to avoid such violation.
B. If company owns “site license” rights to copy software on to several machines or install software on their networks, then software can be copied on to the second system. The exact number of copies that are allowed to be copied should be specified in the licensing agreement and followed accordingly.

Further explanation: Often there is misconception that if company or individual own a copy or software they can use them as they wish. However, according to the copyright principles “owning” a text is not the same as the right to copy the text. We may own an actual physical copy of a book, photograph, computer, disc etc but that does not give us right to copy unless we have purchased license to copy the item.

Scenario 3
Central Questions posed earlier were (1) whether use of quote passage from the e-mail message is protected by the fair use clause and (2) whether the author of the message, the owner of the discussion group or the university that hosts computer groups is the copyright holder for the message?

Answer: Quoting from the e-mail message would probably be fair use regardless of the type of group. If group has ISSN, the fair use conditions would apply. If group does not have ISSN then most secure and ethical would be obtain the permission of the e-mail author before quoting the message. Also it would be beneficial to contact discussion group owner in regards to the quoting practices.

Further explanation: Principle of fair use allows reproduction of short passages for new reporting or in the texts of academic journals such as Technical Communication. Situation here is complicated by the technology involved. According to fair use clause in addition to purpose and amount of work to be copied, “the effects of use” need to be taken into consideration. By using the e-mail message, the author might feel that she was not given the opportunity to publish the work through more traditional means where possibility of remuneration is much greater. On the other hand, sending an e-mail to an electronic discussion is also a form of publishing.
There is no clarity in copyright laws in regards to text sent and distributed in electronic format and it varies from case to case. If the discussion group has received ISSN number it has copyright status. Often, the discussion group’s owner states that copyright belongs to author of the postings or messages sent or group members might have agreement not to cite each other’s messages outside the discussion board.

Scenario 4
Central Questions presented earlier were (1) who “owns” the messages that employer sent? And (2) and what rights does ownership of the messages entail?

Answer: This is not a copy right violation because copyright law principle does not give author “…unlimited property right” to their texts (Beard, 1974, p.382)” (Howard, 1996, p.406). Usually company has sole copyright to the texts that employee produces while being employed by the organization. In this case, if the company’s resources were used to produce emails, the company has rights to use those messages. The above case addresses more issues of privacy than copyright infringement.

Further explanation: In some cases (particularly in university setting), an institution may only receive portion of the remuneration. This is due to the fact that work of the writer was done partly using institution’s resources and partly done on employees own time.

Scenario 5
Central Questions presented earlier were (1) whether the university is entitle to some royalties received for the stack’s publication and (2) whether using the data but not the organization or expression from another work constitutes a copyright infringement?

Answer: If university’s resources were used to develop the stack, the university should get remuneration for use of its facilities. The faculty member should agreed to share percentage of profit with the university. Answer to the question of whether reorganization of data complied in another source constitutes a copyright infringement is no. Faculty member’s use of information is not a copyright infringement because the original expression of data has been avoided. Copyright law also indicates that data are part of public domain. The safest way for the faculty member, however, would be to negotiate some kind of financial arrangement with the persons holding copyright to the reference materials.

Further explanation: Two fundamental principles of copyright law come into conflict in this scenario. One of the principles is that authors and publishers are expected to make profit from their publications, on the other hand there is principle that “ideas and knowledge cannot be the property of any one individual and that only the expression of the ideas belongs to the author or copyright holder” (Howard, 1996 p. 407).

As in many cases that involve electronic texts today there is ambiguity on how Congress and court will deal with changes to the current copyright law. It’s possible that due to hypertext and electronic databases it will allow users rather than authors to determine the ultimate organization and shape of these electronic texts This is fundamentally different from the present copyright law.

Conclusion
As the scenario showed, the new electronic environment in which writing professional must function makes intellectual property and copyright issues more a part of their everyday experience in the workplace. Writers must know the basis of the copyright laws better than ever. The scenarios do not offer how one might turn out in a court of law, but it should offer writers how to avoid copyright infringements.

Howard - Who Owns Electronic Texts

Introduction

At first glance, the title of the essay reviewed here Who “Owns” Electronic Texts doesn’t seem all that out of the ordinary in the year 2008. But that’s exactly the point of including the article in the collection Central Works. Tharon Howard, in the essay, is very forward looking in his assessments of the legalities of copyright and intellectual property rights of authors in the electronic age. One could say that the essay was just slightly “ahead of its time.”

Historical Context

In his review of the history of copyright laws, Howard sets out to discover how electronic means of communication such as digital imaging, software licensing, email communication, and hyper text language hold up to the letter of the law.

Historically, there are three theories of textual ownership that have pervaded for centuries:

1) Authors have a natural right to “own” their work
2) The laws of nature and absolute truths cannot be “owned”
3) Socially-constructed truths have no owner

These theories of ownership were really first challenged when the printing press was invented and books became inexpensive to make and distribute. Ironically, it really wasn’t the author’s ownership that brought about the first copyright laws but rather the publishers right to produce copies. The publishers banded together in a sort of loose union called the Stationers Company and attempted to enforce their own copyrights by allowing certain publishers unlimited rights to produce certain texts. They even established a sort of “book police” that searched out and destroyed all illegal copies of texts.

The U.S. Constitution addressed the issue of the unfair advantage that the Stationers tried to hold on to when it established copyrights that favored the author in Article 1, Section 8. This gave authors the exclusive right to their intellectual property – sort of. The ownership of authors was established for a certain amount of time after which the public then has broader use of texts. This in effect gave authors time to capitalize on their work both monetarily and by partnering with publishers and researchers to further their work.

Now, the laws of the United States in a few ways also address the concept of fair use:

o Texts may be reproduced in limited quantities for use in teaching, criticism, comment, news reporting, and in scholarship and research. Essentially, fair use allows copy of text insofar as it does not interfere with the commercial viability of the work. If a potential market is hindered due to copyright infringement problems will arise for the offender.

o Also laws protect the author’s expression of ideas. This means that, although certain universal truths may be found in scientific and math developments, it is right of the individual who arranged these truths in a formula to protect their intellectual property. i.e.) someone steals the code for a software program

The difficulty that we now experience is in the assignment of copyright and intellectual property laws to electronic forms of communication.

Examples of Electronic Copyright Questions

1) Photo reproduction – it is interesting that he was thinking about this twelve years ago as it is even more pertinent today in this age of digital photography. The verdict – always go to the publisher before using any portion of a photograph or image or better yet, purchase your images legally from iStock or some other image archive.
2) Software usage – always check the legal rights of the purchases before putting software that you did not purchase on your PC or Mac.
3) Quoting material from an email message – in general, check with the author of the message before using it. Many businesses and academic institutions have protected themselves by applying for an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) number. The ISSN number identifies you as the owner of the text.
4) Private email message may be protected or they may not. Check the laws of the state you live in to see if your personal email is protected by privacy laws. I think we’ve learned since the writing of this article that nothing you do electronically is safe. In general, don’t put anything in an email that you wouldn’t want the whole world to see.
5) The fifth example involved something that I was not familiar with – Hyper Card stacks.
A hypertext programming environment for the Macintosh introduced by Apple in 1987. The HyperCard model consists of cards, and collections of cards, called stacks. You can connect the cards in various ways, and leaf through them the way you would with a set of Rolodex cards. In addition to data, each card can contain graphics and buttons that trigger other events, such as sound or video. Each object in a HyperCard system -- stack, card, text field, button, or background -- can have a script associated with it. A script is a set of instructions that specify what actions should take place when a user selects an object with the mouse or when some other event occurs. (from http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/H/HyperCard.htm)

This example really looks at the use of data owned by someone other than yourself and your rights to display the data in a way that is different than its original context. This, of course, is very pertinent in today’s world of instant information from the Web. The author’s advice – go to the source first and ask permission to use the data.

Conclusion

As technical communicators, we will collaborate frequently with other writers, engineers, developers and others. We need to be aware of the implications and consequences of the use of protected material. It is imperative that we keep informed of changes in copyright and intellectual property laws. If you have any doubt about the legality of what you are doing, stop and research the issue. One can never tell how a court will rule in these types of cases and it’s better to be safe than sorry.

Thank you, Vanda and Lance

"What Experienced Collaborators Say about Collaborative Writing" by Allen, Atkinson, Morgan, Moore, and Snow

Introduction

While attending a 2003 professional conference for technical writing instructors, the author noted a shift in attitude toward collaborative writing since her 1987 article had been written. At this point she was asked to reflect formally on the 1987 study.

Although “collaborative groups were taken for granted as part of teaching writing as a process” [351] in academic circles, employers viewed collaborative writing as merely a way to divide the writing workload and/or to provide input as subject matter experts. According to the author, the employers’ perspectives overlooked the value of collaborative writing, which is the increased depth of understanding that arises when co-authors share ideas and develop a common sense of purpose and respect.

In recent years, numerous studies have focused on professional on-the-job writing, but the process and value of collaborative writing was never the primary focus:

• A high frequency of professional collaborative writing exists (Faigley and Miller);


• Collaborative writing is described by the way a document “cycles” from a staff person who researches and drafts the article to the person who edits the draft (Paradis, Dobrin, and Miller)


• Collaborative writing can include a range of activities (Ede and Lunsford)




• Individual planning and drafting of a document that is revised collaboratively (Odell)


• A peer’s critiquing of a co-worker’s draft (Anderson)


• The coauthoring of a document (Ede and Lunsford)

The research returned limited information about the process of collaborative writing and “the special characteristics of collaboration involving group authorship” [354]. The author’s research sought to investigate collaboration as it exists on the job with professional people who work together to plan, draft, and revise a single document.

Research Methods

Participants. The study participants were recruited by the research team and included a wide range of collaborative settings and projects. A total of 20 respondents representing 14 projects were interviewed, and they represented a variety of professional areas: business, university teaching and research, corporate research, government, community service, and a legal firm.

Interview Form. In order to compare responses, a structured interview form was developed. Questions “concerned the membership of the collaborative group, the roles played and contributions made by various group members, the writing process used, and the nature and frequency of group interaction.” [354] The final interview questions evaluated the respondents’ opinions of the final document and the collaborative writing process.

Respondent Interviews. The interviews were performed by a pair of researchers and were recorded. The respondents were asked to describe a “particularly memorable” collaborative-writing experience. The term “particularly memorable” was not defined, and the respondents were not asked to define why the experience was memorable. During the interviews, the respondents were asked to describe as much detail as possible along with their observations and evaluations of the experience.

Analysis. The first stage of analysis involved the demographic information (who, what, where, when, why); the second stage provided information about the collaboration process.

Research Findings

Demographic Information. The author recognizes that although the small sample size does not answer all of the research questions, the results do allow some “tentative conclusions concerning the people, tasks, and processes involved in collaborative writing” to be drawn. [355]

The tasks respondents chose to report on included a wide range of projects: proposals, books, articles, goal statements, reports, and legal briefs. Of the 14 groups surveyed, nine were made up of people whose background, training, and specialties differed.

Information about the Collaborative Writing Process

Group Writing Processes. All groups reported planning the project as an entire group first, which was also reported as being the most satisfying part of the collaborative process. The planning process was most often followed by periods of independent writing. The draft stage was most often assigned to people according to areas of expertise. Interestingly, the two groups that attempted to draft as a group were unable to complete the task, and both groups ended up assigning the writing task to one of the team members. Only one group reported drafting together as a group “word by word, sentence by sentence,” [357] but it should be noted that this group has written collaboratively for 15 years. Like planning, revision was also widely reported to be a group process and caused group members to think of new ideas and perhaps change some old ideas.

Group Interaction. The groups met frequently during the planning phase and most often in a face-to-face manner. As previously mentioned, drafting was most often completed individually while the revision process brought the group together again. The authors found three characteristics of group interaction noteworthy: 1) group members “consciously or unconsciously assumed the role of audience”; [358] 2) conflict occurred in all of the groups with a varying range of tolerance among group members; and 3) three of the groups used computers versus meeting face to face.

Group Decision Making. Decision making was shared in two ways. First, any member was able to oppose any decision made by the group and was not affected by the leadership style of the group. Second, the decision-making power was shared within the context of the group and its related project and did not extend to other contexts. An important note, in my opinion, is that a member’s right to question a decision did not mean a change would be made: “the decisions made within these groups were ones that all members could accept, even though they might not entirely agree with them.” [359]

Group Leadership. Most of the groups were organized around a leader who primarily offered organizational assistance. In nine of the fourteen groups, leadership was established by seniority or rank.

Respondents’ Observations on Collaboration 

The writers interviewed for the study found the benefits of collaboration worth the costs; the costs most often mentioned were time and ego. All respondents felt the documents they produced were better than if they had been produced by an individual (particularly large, complex projects).

Discussion

Functions of Conflict. Although many group members were uncomfortable with conflict, the members nonetheless recognized that conflict contributed to creativity and to the quality of the document.  Irving Janis “found that failure to allow for the development of opposing views within the group could produce such defective decision making that the overall value of group effort was lost.” [360]

Distinguishing Shared-Document Collaboration. The collaborative writing process exhibited three distinguishing features. First, a single document emerged at the end of the collaborative writing process due to shared goals and a unity of purpose by group members. Second, communication is a two-way interactive process and is completely different than a supervisor/subordinate type of relationship. Third, all group members have decision-making power and share the responsibility for the final document.

Group Typology. The groups interviewed were brought together because the size of the task required extensive labor, and/or the size of the task required multiple areas of expertise, and/or one of the goals of the project was to unite opposing perspectives.

Questions

The authors recognize that since the sample size was small, only partial answers were provided. Furthermore, the authors identified numerous areas for future research:

• The respondents only reported on successful collaborative projects. Therefore, what are the aspects of “failed” collaborations


• What sort of leadership is the most productive in the collaborative-writing process?


• How does the type of task impact the collaborative process?


• How is technology impacting the collaborative process?


• A large percentage of groups had academic affiliations. What collaborative processes occur in other arenas?


• What is the interaction between the hierarchy of an organization and the hierarchy of individual group members?

Lori Hood and J.J. Carlson

Central Works: Writing and Database Technology

WRITING AND DATABASE TECHNOLOGY

NOTE: Article originally written in 1996

Data reports refers only to printed reports that are composed of both tables of numbers, words, or both. Tabular reports are the most common.

Reports consisting of data tables are vital to almost every business function. These reports are used by marketing, budgeting, production, and sales. This means many people may require many different versions of the same report, catered to their own personal needs. These reports can be intended strictly for the specific person reading them, or for a general group of readers.

The value of reports is organized record keeping and problem solving. However, many businesspersons lack the proficiency to generate a form and content that directly address a pressing business problem. According to a survey, managers were spending almost half of their work year looking for such data. Often, current reports would need to be adjusted and mathematically figured so that the new reports actually did provide the correct data. This process can be very frustrating and little attention is given in either business or in technical and professional writing classes to building people’s skills in writing effective data reports.

To develop these reports, writers have to transform raw data (“facts”) into meaningful information for a given context, audience, and organizational purpose, and it must be communicated in an effective way. This transformation is a rhetorical activity. People learn about data reporting, not through specialized courses, but in computer training classes, therefore stressing technological skills over rhetorical. This sends the message that knowing how to operate a technology is commensurate with knowing how to use it to its full advantage to achieve a purposeful exchange of information.

Data reporting demands a dynamic interplay between a writer’s rhetorical and technological skills. As such, it should have a place in technical and professional writing classes. The purpose of this essay is to explore unique skills and knowledge that data-report writers need to learn in order to produce effective data reports. Mirel argues that if data reports are to serve readers’ needs for record keeping and problem solving then writers’ technological skills must serve their rhetorical aims and strategies.

DATA REPORTING AS COMMUNICATION

To analyze the interactive rhetorical and technological competencies involved in data-report writing, Mirel first presents a framework for understanding the communicative dimensions of report writing. Historically, data tables have been associated with scientific rationality. However, this asocial view of tabular data ignores the inescapable rhetorical intentions and practical consequences of retrieving and reporting data. Many researchers argue that facts are not simply transferred from senders to receivers, but rather that it is based on a relationship between readers and writers. This relationship-based view of constructing knowledge casts a new light on the writing of data reports.

Many composition specialists examine computer literacy and electronically produced information through this constructivist lens. However, they omit databases and nonlinear tabular communications from the technologies they examine, such as word processing, desktop publishing, electronic conferencing, and E-mail. Some research in rhetoric, visual design, and human factors, however, does focus on database-related communications. This research reveals that

• Key rhetorical strategies inform data searches, retrievals, and reporting;

• Rhetorical and technological skills mutually support and shape each other; and

• Designs for functionally effective tables must facilitate readers’ strategies for answering business questions.

Key Rhetorical Strategies Inform the Searching for, Retrieval of, and Reporting of Electronic Data

Sullivan (1986) concludes that rhetorical invention is the defining feature of electronic data searches. She finds that searchers must possess the following skills, all of which involve invention processes:

• Knowing the meaning of “invisible” data that are stored in the system;

• Focusing on what is at issue in a communication situation (stasis); and

• Determining the most effective topical orientation of a particular purpose (topoi).

Rhetorical invention also comes into play in reporting data. Research finds that writers do not experiment with enough formats. Therefore, they rarely produce the best format for their exact purposes. As on overview of qualities necessary for effective data reports, Zmud (1978) identifies four characteristics that are implicitly rhetorical, as noted in the parenthesis:

• Quality of information (selecting appropriate and relative data);

• Accuracy and sufficiency of information (selecting the right scope and detail);

• Quality of format (sequencing, ordering, and chunking information effectively); and

• Quality of meaning (evoking emphasis, patterns, and relations through logic and layout).

Skills in Rhetoric and Database Technologies Support and Shape Each Other

A number of studies show an inextricable link between rhetorical and technological strategies in data searching and retrieval. Researchers find that unless people know (or invent) (a) the meaning of the data, (b) the significance of data relationships, and (c) the right level of detail for a questions, they will have difficulty understanding the basic program logic of search principles and data structures.

Designs for Functionally Effective Tables Must Facilitate Readers’ Strategies

Developing effective tabular displays of data should lead writers to research on visual rhetoric. A list of such research reports is found on page 384. These researchers emphasize the need to design tables to answer questions that readers will ask. There are three distinct levels of questions and answers: elementary, intermediate, and overall. The goal for designers is to choose a tabular image that answers the majority of questions the information is capable of generating.

Functionality is also important in designing tables. While simplicity works best as an aesthetic preference, it is not always the best strategy for displaying information. Designers should realize that the effectiveness of a table does not depend on how much information it includes, but on how information is layered and ordered to facilitate readers’ interpretations. Developing effective data reports requires writers to be adept at rhetorical strategies for invention, arrangement and delivery, and to understand the logic and capabilities that a program offers for defining, searching for, and retrieving data and for organizing it into printed reports.

METHODOLOGY

To study the rhetorical and technological skills involved in data reporting, Mirel analyzed readers’ reported responses to the actual data reports that they receive and use at work. From these responses, she inferred some knowledge and skills that writers should have to develop effective reports.

Mirel had 25 respondents – project administrators in a national research laboratory. She gathered information on their responses to a report that they received each month. The report was generated from a mainframe financial system. The respondents used the report for tracking costs, managing accounts, and assessing budget over- and under-runs. Mirel conducted a semi-structured interview with the respondents that usually lasted an hour. She asked the respondents the same four questions; then she analyzed the participants’ combined responses for patterns in their strategies and purposes for analyzing the report, for their satisfactions and dissatisfactions with the report, and for their methods of overcoming problems with it.

Mirel showed that the respondents are uniformly dissatisfied with the report and use the report for the same general purposes.

RESULTS

Each month, respondents use the report to answer four central cost-accounting questions: (1) Are all the changes legitimate? (2) Where do high or unusual charges come from? (3) What are the differences between actual and budgeted costs? and (4) Which accounts are likely to run over budget (and how should resources be allocated to avoid that overrun)? The respondents criticized the reports with the following six reasons:

• Information overload: the report has too much data.

• Overly narrow content: it does not give a big enough picture of cumulative months.

• Random data: it does not group or emphasize data for easy interpretation.

• Unprocessed data: it does not calculate key relationships such as variances between actual and budgeted costs.

• Unintelligible data: it labels rows or columns with terms that have unclear meanings.

• Unpresentable data: it has low legibility and layouts with little difference between figure and ground.

Some respondents rearrange their information in some ways, but six of the respondents rearrange their report either on their own PC or in the interface program. These six are considered writers as well as readers. The other respondents believe they lack the technical knowledge to reorganize their reports.

DISCUSSION

Most respondents felt that they lacked the technical knowledge to adapt the software or applications to their specific needs. They need to know how to translate their rhetorical aims into a technologically produced document.

To develop effective reports, writers must learn the database capabilities that enable them to achieve their rhetorical aims for invention, arrangement, and delivery.

The Aims and Processes of Invention in Data Reporting

The success of data reporting depends on fundamental invention processes, namely writers becoming familiar with a subject, identifying issues and questions that concern readers, understanding the optical orientations that address these concerns, and selecting content accordingly.

The respondents’ unhappiness with the report can be traced to many invention issues. The report does not select and display key data relevant to their needs. Many of the respondents wanted other content as well, such as more verbal description about purchases. The report writers need many technical competencies in database applications, but databases are one of the most complicated technologies for lay users to manipulate for their specific purposes. Writers also need to understand if the connections among data that make sense, practically, for solving a business problem are technically feasible. It is only feasible if the data are set up in a special way to allow writers to retrieve data from different databases.

Once the databases are created, report writers have to know how to frame their searches for information in statements that a program will accept and process. Writing search statements involves abiding by the syntax of a program and, at times, becoming creative with its search logic.

Finally, report writers’ technological strategies include assessing whether the data they retrieve are in fact the right data for their purposes. Database users rarely check the answers yielded by a search “failing to search for other levels of data which could supplement or contradict what they already found.”

The Aims and Processes of Arrangement in Data Reporting

One of the greatest challenges for report writers is to choose an appropriate organizing logic for tables that are multifunctional. They need to know that data reports for marketing purposes may take as many as five drafts of a table before a report convincingly shows a supervisor that it is best to target a very small group of low-volume customers because they generate the highest revenue.

Rhetorical purpose should determine whether the best display is a table or some other graphic form. The preset order of columns results in separating data that these readers want to compare. The row headings also do not accommodate the “cut into the data” that some respondents want to take because of the unique structures of their projects.

The Aims and Process of Delivery in Data Reporting

Delivering information in effective visual designs involves giving readers easy access to the data and data relationships relevant to their concerns. Reports used for reference usually display large amounts of data in a small amount of tabular space. Legibility is paramount.

Reports used for problem solving need designs that draw readers’ attention to key information and that help them to distinguish important types and groupings of information. Table displays should create for readers’ paths through the table so that readers perceive particular groupings of data as individual “locales” that they may access at random and read as self-contained information. Type size, style and variation are vital for emphasizing specific elements and relationships; positioning and locating data support people’s conventional strategies for reading left to right and top to bottom. Use of white space is important in creating tables that maintain readers’ understanding.

IMPLICATIONS FOR TEACHING AND FURTHER RESEARCH

For invention, arrangement, and delivery, writers of data reports must dynamically relate rhetorical and technological strategies to produce accessible and purposeful tables of information. The effectiveness of data reports, as judged by readers in an actual communication context, hinges on writers having chosen and implemented conceptual and visible displays that answer readers’ concerns and questions.

Mirel suggests introducing undergraduate students to a curricula including technical and professional writing. It would be especially beneficial if the writing and computing teachers could provide some collaboration for the students and can include team teaching to show how both areas cross over.

To better understand the rhetorical and technological competencies involved in data reporting, researchers need to investigate the ways in which various features and functions of database applications enhance or constrain rhetorical choices. More studies should focus on report writers and actual readers in natural work settings, closely assessing the qualities that characterize effectiveness for different types of data reports and the processes involved in producing them. These studies need to extend long enough for researchers to iteratively test writers’ choices and revisions against readers’ actual uses of a document.

Summary of Chapter 8: Barker

by Gary Teagarden and Jennifer Bruns

Conducting Usability Tests

This informative chapter covers usability testing for document and software design.

There are 10 steps in the process of usability testing:

1. Decide when to test
2. Select the test points
3. Choose the type of test
4. Set performance and learning objectives
5. Select testers and evaluators
6. Prepare the test materials
7. Set up the test environment
8. Record information accurately
9. Interpret the data
10. Incorporate the feedback

1. Decide When to Test
You can test at any time during the nine stages of the documentation development process. Usually you test after you have a draft finished so you can see the areas that need testing. But you can test during the three major phases: design, writing or development.

2. Select the Test Points
A test pint is an issue or feature of a document that might interfere with the efficient and effective application of a program to a user’s work activities. Test points fall into two areas: problems with content and problems with document design. Test points could be body text size, heading size, cropped screens vs. whole screens, cues for steps and page orientation.

3. Choose the Type of Test
There are three types of tests—dependent upon the test points selected in step two.
Can-they-do-it test
Can-they-understand-it test
Can-they-find-it-test

4. Set Performance and Learning Objectives
Because you want your tests to measure actual behavior, you must come up with numbers that correlate with the kind of performance you want from your users. These are often called operational objectives. There are two broad categories of performance objectives: Time-related and error-related.

5. Select Testers and Evaluators
The tester is the person who administers the test, arranges the meeting with users, sets up the test situation, records the test activities, and so on. The evaluator is the person taking the usability test.

6. Prepare the Test Materials
Depending on the complexity of your usability test, the written and other materials you supply for testers and evaluators can get complicated. See Tables 8.5 and 8.6 (P.248-249) in the text for a comprehensive list of potential test materials.

7. Set Up the Test Environment
The environment for your test may range from the user’s work environment (the field) to a controlled laboratory. Your best chance to learn about actual use in the context of the user’s work and information environment comes from field testing.

8. Record Information Accurately
Recommend using voice and video recorders, plus take copious notes so that you don’t miss anything.

9. Interpret the Data
Interpretation requires you to take into account all the elements that can go wrong with testing so that you get clear results.

10. Incorporate the Feedback
Following the interpretation your data then the next step is to incorporate the results into your final design.

The author talks about the test paradox: The earlier you test the weaker the results but the easier it is to make changes; the later you test the better the results but the harder it is to make changes.

Some large companies, such as IBM have full-blown usability labs replete with two-way mirrors, video cameras and eye-tracking devices. Ironically, often the best results from usability testing comes from field testing. In addition, field testing is less expensive. But field research poses issues of time, politics, budgets, ethics, and legality that require you to proceed carefully.

Campbell, Chapter 8, “Did I Forget Anything?”

Introduction
Be thorough! The writer is ultimately responsible for mistakes and errors in completed projects.

Creating a Perfect Document
Be sure that you use a review process to ensure that your document does what you want it to do.
There are five types of reviews:
1. Verification (e.g., accuracy)
2. Validation
3. Editing
4. Proofreading (e.g., spelling, punctuation)
5. Approval (e.g., getting clearance)

It is important to keep in mind that these reviews should be done in the above order so that the most critical issues are addressed first.

Can I combine a review?
You can, and sometimes it is effective. However, sometimes this is a more demanding and requires greater skill from the reviewer. When you try to compress all the reviews into fewer steps, something will usually suffer. If you choose to combine reviews, be sure your reviewer knows what you are really looking for from them – whether it is punctuality mistakes or accuracy of the information – they need to know. Having multiple reviewers is another way to ensure that more errors are found in less time. Failure to plan adequate review time is a guarantee that a document will go out with mistakes in it.

The rest of the chapter describes the review steps in detail:

Verification
• Checking for accuracy – information up-to-date, correct, dimensions accurate, eligibility requirements correct, etc.
• Various methods: compare the final draft to the original draft, check it against source documents, confirm numerical and statistical data, or assign a content expert to do the review.

You can combine them or perform them separately.
• Especially important in procedures, where perfection is vital.
• Sometimes, verification can be combined with editing, but it’s usually best if these are done in a separate review. You must be in an “accuracy” mindset when reviewing facts and important data.

Validation
• Checking for usability – policy or procedure understandable, well delivered, does it work in the real world, etc.
• Make sure the concept is understandable. Read the policy completely through to see if it makes sense or if anything is missing. Some writers can do this themselves, but it is easier if there are at least one or two other reviewers.
• Policies can be difficult to validate, as they’re often ambiguous or hard to measure. Usability testing is the best way to test a policy, so use this when possible. You can watch or gauge your reviewer’s difficulties or confusions and make the changes when appropriate. Honest feedback is important.
• Validating procedures does take longer because you’re actually testing the steps and sequence. Again, more eyes make for a better review. Use walk-throughs, observation, focus groups, and surveys to gauge responses. All of these steps require that you go through the basic steps of preparation, testing, debriefing, and documentation.
• Look for anything that indicates a problem on the user’s part: hesitation, guesswork, rereading, page flipping, or improvisation.

Editing
• Most are familiar with this – once you’re sure the content is correct and understandable, you can move on to editing. Editing presents a unique challenge – improve the policy without changing the meaning.
• Use this review to check for format, wording, consistency, flow, cohesion, layout and visual appeal.
• Number of edits depends on the document and project. Use the number you feel is appropriate.
• Approach editing with great precision. Know what you’re editing for, and plan time to do it. Make sure you are going to be uninterrupted when editing so that you can give the document your full attention.
• Keep an eye out for detail for important matters mechanical correctness, not trivial ones. Be sure that you are not looking for small changes like typographical errors in editing – save that for the proofreading phase.
• Review the page layout, look at the formats, consider the design elements, and scrutinize everything for consistency and logic.

Proofreading
• Proofreading is an important, although not necessarily the most enjoyable, task. Most writers consider proofing insignificant. However, if you do not spend time proofreading your document, you may let small mistakes get through. This can question your credibility with your audience. Consider proofreading your final walk-through of your document.
• Decontextualizing is the secret to effective proofreading. Reverse the learned habit of reading for meaning and concept. Take the letters, numbers, and words out of context and consider them as strictly letters, numbers, and words.
• To proofread, you can try many different methods – read backwards, read aloud, read into a tape recorder, read with a partner, read diagonally, turn the page upside down, photocopy it, scan it, or take frequent breaks.
• Look for every single imperfection, typographical errors, punctuation, spacing, spelling, agreement, page breaks, titles, misplaced words and phrases, alignment, names, numbers, typestyle, typesize, and margins. When proofreading graphics, be sure you view all details – enlarge the graphic, make certain all numbers are correct, every line is plotted accurately, every item is correctly labeled, and the information in the graphic is consistent with the text.
• The most common errors: transposed letters, duplicate letters, omitted letters, and substitute letters. All proofreaders also have their own ‘blind spots’ – know what yours are and make a mental rule so that you can remember what is correct.
• If you choose to proofread your own material, be sure you are very thorough. It’s best, however, to hand it off to someone else to proof if you can.
• All writers have deadlines. Make sure that you always allow some time for proofing, no matter what.

Approval
• Getting clearance is the last step of documentation review. Send your document to the designated approvers when you’ve completed the above four review steps. However, be sure that you keep in constant communication with your reviews throughout your documentation process. Ask for their input, or consult with them if you need to – approvers don’t like surprises.
• It is best to have a formal procedure in place for approving documents. Make sure your procedure outlines time frames and the approval cycle so that there are minimal questions from the approvers. Once these approvers receive a draft, be sure they know you are expecting their input and that all comments will be considered.
• Slow response time is usually a problem. Most managers and approvers are busy, and will often be swamped with other work and your review will just be one extra thing. Strive to make your document approval an easy process by making a form that makes the approval quick and painless. See the sample form in Chapter 8 for ideas.
• Sometimes approvers disagree on documents – don’t let this bother you. Opinions are what you are looking for with your document review, and it is better to get these opinions and thoughts out in the open before the policy is in place and it then becomes more difficult to change. Stay on top of the approval by coordinating and communicating amongst the approvers. Analyze their responses and look for validity and set up meetings if your approvers require one to come to a consensus.
• You can also have unofficial approvers for your document. Frontline managers, group leaders, or even informal clique leaders can be key supporters for the document. Keep these people in mind in your writing and review process as well – always keep those lines of communication open.

The Critical Decision: Who Reviews?
It is always better to have others review your work. Their eyes are fresher and they are not too closely tied to the doc. Sometimes, it is not always possible to have other reviewers, and when you MUST review your own work, you’ll have to exercise twice your normal discipline.

Submitted by Team 1: Beeman & Xiong

Barker, Chapter 9: Editing and Fine Tuning

1. Establish Project Guidelines
Everyone involved should understand their roles for each project, as well as the team goals. A person may be a combined writer/editor, a writer, or an editor. The four types of editing that should be covered in a project are managerial editing, substantive editing, copyediting, and proofreading.

2. Understand the Types of Editing
Managerial editing: Sometimes called the production editing stage, this type of editing involves the documentation planning and production.

Substantive editing: Sometimes called the developmental editing stage, this type of editing involves information and language editing.

Copyediting: This type of editing involves consistency and accuracy in grammar and the document's format.

Proofreading: This type of editing involves giving everything a final look to make sure there are no inconsistencies or errors.

Note: When editing help documents, online testing and editing is important to ensure proper setup of the document on the computer.

3. Plan Your Editing Tasks
Plan and schedule the editing tasks in the early stages of production. Take into consideration the amount of time needed to complete each task when scheduling editing work. Make sure that when editing, no other tasks are performed. It is not the job of the editor to perform any of the writer's tasks, and it could back up the schedule if other tasks are worked on when they shouldn't be.

4. Develop the Appropriate Editing Forms
Develop and use editing forms to standardize editing practices and ensure efficient communication among multiple editors. Of particular importance is the style sheet (a running list of style decisions that have been made for the current document) and the style guide (a higher-level document that broadly defines the style of the document class or organization). Once these documents have been developed, encourage their use.

5. Conduct Editing Sessions
Sooner or later, you will sit down with the document and begin editing. Find an environment that maximizes your ability to concentrate. For most people, it must be absolutely quiet, with no disruptions. Use an editing checklist to make sure you don't skip any editing tasks--especially important when editing your own writing. Try editing with a partner--two brains are better than one. Also consider working on each task for only a short time. Your attention will be less likely to wander. Use multiple, separate editing techniques, rather than trying to catch everything on the first pass.

DISCUSSION

Editing Graphics
Figures and tables are often the first things a user will look at. The editor must ensure that the figures and tables are appropriate and accurate and that they match the document's style. Avoid cluttering screen shots with arrows and callouts--they distract when overused. Ask yourself, Will this figure help the user understand the information? Is there a better way? Know your audience.

Writing v. Editing
Writing and editing are completely separate tasks. If you are the writer and the editor, try to let the document cool off before you begin editing it. You'll need some distance to make unclouded decisions about your own work. If you are the editor of someone else's work, give them suggestions but avoid researching and writing for them.

Crossing Cultures
If your document will be read by non-native English speakers, try to make it easy on them by using simplified English. Simplified English stresses the active voice, the use of articles, the use of consistent language, and the construction of short, direct sentences. If the document will be globalized, used generic language that will be understandable across cultures. If your document will be localized, use language that is familiar to the culture the document is destined for.

When editing for translations, the rules for simplified English apply. In general, try to make it easy on the translator to render the text into a different language. This is complicated and requires specialized training and practice.

Editing Online Help
Editing online help systems is similar to editing paper documents, but there are some differences. Pay special attention to the index and links because these will be used heavily by the average user. Edit on paper and on screen because it is generally easier to edit on paper, but you need to see how the document works on screen as well. Make sure you have an up-to-date topics list so you can check the completeness of the help system.

Knowing What's Correct
Much of the time, you won't. Consult various authorities to arrive at a consensus opinion, then stick with it. Above all, ensure that your document achieves the document's goals.

Working with Others
1. Be Positive; Don't Be a Pain in the Neck
2. See #1.