Mixing, Mashing, and Merging Maggie Ryan

The issues of copyright law are progressing through time and becoming more intricate, as it’s become all too easy to remix a photo or video to suit that of a rhetor’s intended purpose through the simple and quick use of digital media. Whether or not remixing a photo is considered fair use is a question that’s not so simple to unpack due to the regulations behind each individual’s background situation. In the case of Maggie Ryan, Maggie never formally consented to the photo being utilized and remixed for the purpose of the university, but a number of questions were raised as to whether or not the university had the right to utilize it, being that she was their student on their property. In her case, rhetorical velocity, appropriation, delivery, and recomposition are interconnected key terms that are consistently present throughout the situation at hand. When viewed separately, it is obvious that these terms are individual aspects that form the rhetorical situation as a whole when mingled together.

The controversy in Maggie’s case is that the photo was taken out of context to suit that of a completely separate topic- one that displays winter fun across the campus, differing significantly from that of protesting against sweatshops on campus. The original situation was no longer present in any sense. Without consent from Maggie, the question is asked as to just how the university can justify using her photo for a subject completely irrelevant to her argument. They appropriated her photo, meaning they utilized and altered her photo without official permission. In addition, they recomposited the photo, or in other words, changed the scenic background and transformed the emotional expressions of the character for the sake of their argument. Lastly, they delivered the photo through the media and made it public as a completely new and transformed text. The remixed photo is therefore a reformed text, yet still not technically new. Therefore, with this photo being used, I do not feel that fair use has been practiced in this situation.

The same notion can apply to modern-day examples. I personally created a rhetorical remix of Disney movies for an assignment to display gender stereotypes in short clips throughout each of the movies, such as Beauty and the Beast, Mulan, The Little Mermaid, and so on.  The genre here is changed to suit that of the intended purpose of the rhetor (me), which is to display these stereotypes throughout the course of one short remixed video. It is no longer focused on the Happily Ever After topic that Disney so often portrays; rather, it becomes focused on a new subject of gender issues within these movies. Although the movie clips themselves have not been changed or recomposed as regarding appearance, the order through which they are presented is changed in order to demonstrate similar instances in each movie that highlights the issue at hand. Similar to Maggie’s situation, thev video was remixed to show a purpose that differently immensely from the proposed subject.

In my personal opinion, rhetorical velocity is the most significant term in the rhetorical situation. It is primarily the backbone through which the supplementary terms can come into play. "Rhetorical velocity is a strategic concept of delivery in which a rhetor theorizes the possibilities for the recomposition of a text based on how he/ she anticipates how the text might later be used.” (Ridolfo 229) This step alone contributes the the future action taken for recomposition and eventual delivery. Without theorizing potential success, the next steps cannot be taken.

In relating Maggie’s case to to Miller’s definition of genre, I think there is a connection between delivery and rhetorical velocity that is certainly present. Rhetorical velocity focuses on the significant ways in which presenting a text will be most effective. While it does not exactly define genre, it relates to genre by focusing on multiple genres that may have potential in being successful throughout the rhetorical process. Recomposition essentially focuses on altering the delivery method through which a text is presented and then interpreted by its viewers. “In rhetoric, the term “genre” can be limited to a particular type of discourse classification based in rhetorical practice and consequently open rather than closed and organized around situated actions." (Miller 155)  The discourse here was open considering it was utilized for other potential purposes. Another quote Miller states is, “genre connects the private with the public.” (Miller 163) This can directly relate to Maggie’s situation. While it is unethical to misuse her photo to demonstrate a new purpose, she was in the public domain and aware of her surroundings and the cameras as she was protesting, rather than in the privacy of her own home. Therefore, whether or not it is legally acceptable to use her photo is a question that is not so simple to answer. She was in the commons, which Ridolfo and Rife state is“a place where what is or once was owned can be re-owned by another. "(Ridolfo 236) The fundamental issue is that the photo taken by the campus community while she was projecting her use of free speech. “Genre depends upon the complexity and diversity of the society.” (Miller 163) Clearly, genre was dependent on the subject at hand, whether that was campus fun or protests against sweatshops.

-Vanessa Coppola