Report on My Interviewees

1. The most interesting genres I learned from my interviewees was the poster-presentation, powerpoint-lecture, and the research report; the latter two being more significant than the others and the former being the most interesting.

2. These genres differ from each other in their content length and verbosity and specifically incorporation of media .

3. The challenging aspects for each of the respective genres as explained by Dr. Nighorn and Dr. Oland are as follows:

• Poster-presentation: Visual appeal combined with all necessary information
• Power-point lecture: Including information but not boring audience, assuming what audience knows or does not know.
• Research report: Creating the right flow to properly convey process, question, and analysis and creating a visually and textually appealing piece that will properly inform and encompass what was done 

4. The exciting/interesting parts for each of the respective genres as explained by both interviewees are as follows:

• Poster-presentation: presenting complicated concepts through images and minimal words to all audiences
• Power-point lecture: teaching all students in spite of what they do or don't have
• Research report: developing never before-heard-of ideas

5. Poster-presentations must be found in the actual classroom and conference halls, and power-point lectures can be found on teacher websites, and research reports can be found on scientific sites such as Pub Med.

From Academia to Social Media

1. I was able to find the author of "Using goal-driven deep learning models to understand sensory cortex", Daniel Yamins, on Facebook.

2. Through Facebook, I discovered much more of the unpublished pieces by the author and much more of his educational background. I skipped the personal information available, but I found he spends his vocational time working at Princeton University and MIT as a researcher after graduating from Harvard. He even explains his in addition to neuroscience, he enjoys writing and researching the psychological aspects of the brain, as he made evident with his latest casual post on Facebook regarding the importance of prediction over explanation in psychological field.

3. His persona does not change much as he maintains his tone from his work to his social media compositions. He uses this other platform to explore a field he does not declare himself an expert in.

Academic Discourse & Genre

1. Consistent with what my interviewees said was the dominant style of all scientific literature, Nature Neuroscience as a whole is written with conventions of an APA composition in mind. The title page, table of contents, subheadings, page numbers, bibliography (citations), among other facets of the style are evident throughout. Furthermore, the actual pieces are divided into four prominent sections of perspective, review, commentary, and editorial. Some vary in length, but each and every piece, regardless of author, follow the conventions of a research report (same as the ones my interviewees published). The previously blogged-about conventions of a research report are nearly identical to what I found in this academic journal.

2. Although I cannot really differentiate between genres in this journal, I can point out varying points in some of the pieces. Perspective and commentary pieces within this journal are composed by less authors than any other type of pieces. They also tends to be more abstract and conceptual and because of this, the author values normative pieces of statistics. Consequentially, the media within the pieces are bar graphs and surveys rather than numerical diagrams such as line or scatter plots. The editorials incorporate conceptual and concrete pieces of evidence are much more verbose in nature, but maintain the conventions of a thesis-oriented research report. The reviews are the most critical in nature and spend more time objectifying a thesis rather than defending one and incorporate numerical values more.

3. The purpose of the research report genre, as previously blogged about, is a thoroughly explained and inclusive presentation of an identified hypothesis that often includes a question, explanation of process, and analysis of the process and results that often incorporates media (graphs, diagrams, etc.). This genre is often utilized to present an educated party's experimental process refuting or backing a previous claim (usually in the realm of science). The report is created to not only present and inform, but perhaps educated peers, fellows, and avid learners within the field as science is an ever-evolving discipline.

Rhetorical Analysis of Academic Journal

1. Dozens and dozens of authors are represented in  Nature Neuroscience (full-text, electronic version). After thoroughly skimming through the content, one can presume the authors, from top to bottom, are experts in the field of advancement of neural computation and theories. It would be a fruitless effort to describe each and every one of the authors but from postdoctoral fellows to medical evolutionists across the board, the commonality between all is their expertise in the mechanical and biophysical aspects of neuroscience.

2. The intended audience of the journal judging from the number of advanced technical terminology and professional manner is primarily fellow experts in the field, such as leading researchers at universities. Although not necessarily indicated, a secondary audience that is probably a substantial portion of the readership of the journal is aspiring disciples in the field.

3. The context surrounding the particular March 2016 issue concerns the recently discovered theoretical nature of the science as a whole. The discussion, reviews, and perspectives presented all are pertaining to the ever-changing environment of the neuroscience field in which the current thinking may become past-thinking at a moment's notice.

4. This issue's particular message regards the recent advances in neural circuiting, particularly the overall computation-oriented nature of neuroscience. Its message can be defined in its effort to turn behavior and cognition into numbers and explained sciences.

5. The purpose of Nature Neuroscience's March 2016 issue is of a informative nature. This issue highlights the theoretically-driven sciences of psychiatric illnesses and cognitive estimation.

My Major

1. Students majoring in Neuroscience & Cognitive Science learn the physiological and cognitive qualities of the brain and its mechanisms, comprehension of behaviors and environments from a physiological and cognitive perspective, and other various facets of the intricate human nervous system.

2. People who get degrees in the field tend to pursue health-care related endeavors as well as vocational duties as teachers, professors, researchers, laboratory technicians, policy-developers, and non-profit organizers.

3. What drew me to the field of Neuroscience & Cognitive Science is its relative newness to the scientific playing field. The brain is undoubtedly the most undiscovered anatomical part of the human body and it has been said 90% of what is to be discovered in the field has not. This opportunity for breakthrough, educational discovery, and pure curiosity is what drew me to the field.

4. The three most exciting people in recent memory within the neuroscience discipline are Dr. Bennett Omalu, Dr. Miguel Nicolelis, and Dr. Fred Gage. Dr. Bennett Omalu was the leader of push against the National Football League to acknowledge the detriment of concussions in the NFL. Also in the sports field, Dr. Miguel Nicolelis made it possible for a quadriplegic teen to kick the opening kickoff at the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. Dr. Fred Gage is at the forefront of discovering a cure to degenerative brain diseases such as Alzheimer's.

5. Three leading academic journals in the neuroscience discipline:

• Nature Reviews Neuroscience (United Kingdom)
• Annual Review of Neuroscience (United States)
• Neuron (United States)

My Interviewees on Social Media

1. I was able to find Dr. Lynne Oland's LinkedIn and Facebook profile but Dr. Alan Nighorn seems as if he likes to stray away from social media, as I could only find bits and pieces of information about him on Facebook and LinkedIn.

2. Dr. Lynne Oland's internet presence is quite professional in that her education and publications are at the forefront of her social media identity. I was able to see the education she's received and the jobs she'd held over her long tenure within the neuroscience field. As opposed, Dr. Alan Nighorn's social media presence was more lax and personalized in nature. On Facebook, I was able to see the experiences he shares with his students, such as sharing his scuba-diving adventure photos with the class, and the opinions his preceptors have of him on LinkedIn.

3. Dr. Nighorn's verbose and critical style within his research reports and reviews differ largely with his relaxed, personalized, and almost fun classroom setting that is portrayed on his social media interface. Dr. Oland, on the other hand, seemingly makes it a priority to keep her social media presence and academic presence in correlation as her professionalism and prioritization of education are evident in both realms of academia and society.

My Interviewees as Professional Writers

Lynne Oland

Research Professor

1. Dr. Oland frequently conducts reviews of ongoing studies within the Neuroscience discipline, composes chapters in scientific textbooks, and even publishes her original ideas in the form of a research report.

2. In Dr. Oland's research reports, she utilizes a form similar to that of APA-style. She includes an abstract detailing what will be forthcoming and discussed in the report of her work. Bearing resemblance to a QRG, this specific report, "Activation of Glial FGFRs Is Essential in Glial Migration, Proliferation, and Survival and in Glia-Neuron Signaling during Olfactory System Development," effectively manipulates white space, subheadings, and media (figures/diagrams/images) to present her ideas and work clearly, succinctly, and appealingly. The conventions of this genre include a more technical language and a notably descriptive acknowledgments/references page. Dr. Oland also publishes her data sets and results separately for more specific audiences, such as Figure S6. Unlike her research report, her publication of data is less concerned with words and more with material. She formats her tables and color-codes the presented data for easy comprehension for the scientific community and the concerned audience. There is no reference or acknowledgments page because this is purely her work she is sharing with her peers and audience. The most notable contrast I found between her data presentations and research reports was the consideration of presentation, or lack thereof; one is verbose, articulate and the other is straightforward.

3. The context surrounding each piece bears similarity in audience and author, but the purpose differs in that each composition can be used differently by the audience. The technical nature of both pieces allow us to assume Dr. Lynne Oland, Ph.D. intended her work for educated audiences particularly in the field of neuroscience. The report is created in the context that it is based upon months of research and experimentation, peer review, and more explanatory and the audience is meant to observe rather than utilize. On the other hand, the data presentation does not represent any of Oland's own linguistic work but her laboratory work and it is presented to the audience so that the data can be manipulated and used for say a professor's own scientific endeavors or presentation.

4. The message of the research report is to elaborately explain each step of the strenuous, developmental, and revealing process Oland and her team underwent to discover the glia's vitality to the olfactory system. Oland's data table is to simply convey the numerical data she received following her experimentation.

5. The purpose of each piece, as previously discussed in the context question of this post, differs in the audience's intended usage of the data. Purpose of the research report is for the audience to observe and articulate while the data table is presented for the audience to use.

Alan Nighorn

Department Head

1. Nighorn's vast expertise in the neuroscience discipline allows for him to be an advanced peer-reviewer as well as publisher of selected peer-reviewed publications.

2. Here is one of Nighorn's reviews and one of his many publications reviewed by committees of experts. Nighorn's reports follow identical conventions as that of Oland's research reports. I have reason to believe there is a standard and format (APA) set out for all compositions that are a scientific report in nature. His reviews on the other hand are of a much more critical and personalized nature, where the diction of his report is detached and cold. Being an expert on the field allows himself to be more constructive and respected as a reviewer. I would say the largest difference in the genres is the tone created.

3. The context differs in that Nighorn is following up on his own work in a report and in his review he is responding to another party's work.

4. The message Nighorn varies from the review to the report. The report is sending a message regarding the knowledge the experimentation has given to the scientific community and the review is sending a message specifically to the respective author,

5. The purpose of the review is to assist the author and the scientific community as a whole in order for more knowledge to be published and the report is similar in its purpose to add to the scientific knowledge database.

My Interview Subjects

"Lynne Oland, Ph.D" via The University of Arizona College of Science. Public Domain Dedication License.

Lynne Oland, Ph.D. 

Research Professor (Department of Neuroscience & Cognitive Science at the University of Arizonaa)

Scheduled Interview: 11:00 AM on February 25th at 624A Gould-Simpson Building

Experience: 42 years in field

Education: 

• University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (B.S. Nursing)
• The Catholic University of America, Washington, DC (MS Nursing with minor in Curriculum and Instruction) 
• University of North Carolina (Ph. D. Physiology) - Thesis: Processing of Signals from the Median and Lateral Eyes

Interview Questions:

1. What are the most common writing genres that you regularly write in as a research professor? 
2. Does social media have any place in the field of research?
3. In your 42 years of professional work, what kinds of audiences have you found yourself writing for or to, both within your organization and outside? 
4. Do you compose your genres assuming the audience is familiar with the technicalities of your research? If not, what steps do you take to make the composition more inclusive to less-educated audience members?
5. What is the most challenging obstacle in your work in your respective genres that you have encountered in your career?
6. In the past four decades, how has the writing within your profession changed or evolved?
7. What is your preferred genre? Lecture? Video? Conference? Podcast? Essay? Report?
8. Here are a few stylistic questions that intrigue me personally. As a college student, procrastination is the essence of my time management practices. As a professor, do you find these practices change over time for the better or stay consistent? Where is your favorite place to write? What is your solution to overcome a writer's block? 
9. Is all of your research, especially the ones displayed in whatever genre, conducted in the hope of publication?
10. For the pieces that aspire to be published, what steps are taken to get from an abstract idea to a concrete writing piece?
11. Is there anything about professional communication, the field of neuroscience, or your position specifically, that you think students or young people just starting out in the field should know? 
12. Would you be open to answering some follow-up questions over email or in person sometime in the next few weeks as I work on the project?

"Alan Nighorn, Ph.D." via UA Honors College. Public Domain Dedication License.

Alan Nighorn, Ph.D.

Professor & Department Head (Department of Neuroscience & Cognitive Science at the University of Arizona)

Scheduled Interview: 10:30 AM on February 25th at 603 Gould-Simpson Building

Experience: 29 years in field

Education: 

• University of Wisconsin, Madison (B.S. Biochemistry)
• Baylor College of Medicine, Houston (Ph.D. Cell Biology)

Interview Questions

1. As a department head, what are the most common writing genres that you regularly write in as? 
2. In your many years of professional work, what kinds of audiences have you found yourself writing for or to, both within your organization and outside?
3. Is the genre you choose dependent upon who you are addressing? If so, what is the variation between addressing the faculty as a whole, or just the students, or when addressing both?
4. What is the most challenging obstacle in your work in your respective genres that you have encountered in your career?
5. During your time in the field, how has the writing within your profession changed or evolved?
6. What is your preferred genre? Lecture? Video? Conference? Podcast? Essay? Report?
7. Please discuss the different types of genres you have composed within between your time as a student in medical school, postdoctoral fellow, professor, and department head. Why would you say the respective positions gravitate towards each of the respective genres?
8. Here are a few stylistic questions that intrigue me personally. As a college student, procrastination is the essence of my time management practices. As a professor, do you find these practices change over time for the better or stay consistent? Where is your favorite place to write? What is your solution to overcome a writer's block? 
9. Is all of your research, especially the ones displayed in each respective genre, conducted in the hope of publication?
10. For the pieces that aspire to be published, what steps are taken to get from an abstract idea to a concrete writing piece? I see that peer-review is a valued trait in publications based on your list of publications online, what is the process of peer reviewal? The submission process? The committee evaluating your work? 
11. Is there anything about professional communication, the field of neuroscience, or your position specifically, that you think students or young people just starting out in the field should know? 
12. Would you be open to answering some follow-up questions over email or in person sometime in the next few weeks as I work on the project?

Brutally Honest Self-Assessment

1. I feel as if I properly addressed the prompt as well as the conventions of a QRG but content-wise and because of my ill-handled time management, I am anxious and nervous. I am not sure what Sean will be looking for quite exactly as some parts of the rubric were left vague and up to interpretation. Overall, not very good.

2. A major weakness is the lack of setting and imagery, but I believe there is not much environment or senses to be appealed to in my controversy but nonetheless, I believe Sean will be looking for somewhat of a descriptive aura to the piece so I may be lacking in that front.

3.  A major strength is the flow and structure of my QRG. I believe I really utilized the conventions advantageously and mastered the transitory nature of the subheadings so I am hoping that will bode well in my favor.

4. I slipped up in my time management (I promise myself I would not) overall. I have been out sick and out of town for five days but there is no one to blame but myself as I have had plenty of caution and information on the project for weeks now. I hope to improve for the next project drastically as here I am at 10:30 PM rushing to get everything in and perfecting every corner that I still can. Overall, a very enlightening and learning experience.

P.S. I do believe some of the release blog posts were unnecessary. Especially during crunch-time when I am really doing my best work under pressure I rather not be assorting verbs into a three-column. I do understand the purpose but think they should be a part of the review process rather than release. Just a thought I had and wanted to share after Sean told us to voice our opinions in class this week.

Local Revision: Variety

1. I pride myself in the variation of the structure, flow, and syntax of my piece. My sentences vary from compound complex to extremely simple. Any redundant sentence patterns I did on purpose as a part of the rhetorical strategy of anaphora in which I believe the flow of my introductory paragraphs is bettered.

2. Aside from my obvious elongated paragraph in the QRG, I believe the variance and structure (length) of my paragraphs comply with the conventions of a standard quick reference guide. I believe the subheadings specifically serve to provide much needed transition, and I will add to that as I draft.

3. I do believe there is the necessary variety and flavor in my vocabulary, but sometimes I overdo it and in that case 'more is less' and I take away from the piece by going over the top.

Local Revision: Pronoun Usage

1. What I discovered is actually my ineptitude in utilizing pronouns. I see that I rather use euphemisms, substitutions, or basically anything that does the same thing as a pronoun but is not actually a pronoun. I believe this is a part of my verbose writing style and also adds more flow and transitory elements to the structure of my piece.

2. I did not find any particular instances in which I speak or refer directly to the audience but I believe I should be doing more of that. Personalizing the story will not only engage the reader but magnify the significance of this controversy and perhaps provide this in a light each respective reader can equate to. Particularly in the section where I discuss the dissatisfaction and fear parents possess in their children playing football considering the degenerative brain consequences of participating, I believe in a section like this audience rhetoric would drive home the matter.

My Pronouns

its

it

it

it

its

their

it

he

his

he

they

their

their

this

its

their

Local Revision: Passive and Active Voice

changed

is

is

became

became

took

sued

concealing

forked

promises

was

was

discovered

passed

had

possess

concealed

overwhelmed

evade

is

cost

collapse

wants

employs

built

providing

standing

is

holds

attempting

evade

proved

sued

stated

has

made

is

is

found

defines

risk

perceive

presides

are

grouped

pitted

can
save
will
be
compensated
play
are
are
are
operating
was
has
taken
preserve
achieved
hiring
ensure
are
joining
are
leading
is
conducted
is
working
hindered
eliciting
have
become
entailing
playing
brought
hear
play
claims
collapse

1. Something I would have disregarded had it not been for this breakdown, the use of specific powerful active specific verbs, or lack thereof, is what is making or breaking m piece. Most of my used verbs are vague, and some hints of passiveness are assimilated but I believe they are essential to the flow of the piece.

2. My use of verbs could be improved overall in the project by making the vague words more specific. I did in some instances but was lazier in others. Simply changing the verb became to acclimated to would enhance the flow and power of the postmortem of the controversy

Local Revision: Tense Usage

Past

changed

became x 2

took

sued x 2

forked

was x 2

discovered

passed

had

concealed

overwhelmed

proved

stated

has x 5

made

found

grouped

pitted

compensated

has

taken x 4

conducted

hindered

have

brought

Present

is x 9

concealing

promises x 3

possess

evade

collapse x 2

employs x 2

wants

providing

standing

holds

attempting

evade

perceive

presides

hiring

preserve

operating

eliciting

entailing

playing x 2

hear

play

claims

are x 8

claims x 2

Future

can

will

ensure

evade x 2

perceive

cost

should

risk x 2

1. I don't think there is one singular tense that is prevalent in my draft, but rather a culmination of past and present.

2. The effect the current usage has that it makes the audience feels like this is a post-controversy mortem in that is a crisis of the past in terms of events but the issue is still prevalent today in that how the league, players, and society follows this controversy is a current event issue. That is what the mixture of past and present tenses does.

3. I believe the flow is good as it is and I do not plan to change it, but perhaps adjust to maybe enhance the fluidity of the transitions.

4. I have employed present tense verbs in my piece because I believes it adds to the power and flow of the piece.

My Verbs

changed

is

is

became

became

took

sued

concealing

forked

promises

was

was

discovered

passed

had

possess

concealed

overwhelmed

evade

is

cost

collapse

wants

employs

built

providing

standing

is

holds

attempting

evade

proved

sued

stated

has

made

is

is

found

defines

risk

perceive

presides

are

grouped

pitted

can
save
will
be
compensated
play
are
are
are
operating
was
has
taken
preserve
achieved
hiring
ensure
are
joining
are
leading
is
conducted
is
working
hindered
eliciting
have
become
entailing
playing
brought
hear
play
claims
collapse

is 9x became 2x collapse 2x was 2x sued 2x conceal 2x employs 2x promises 3x has 5x take 4x evade 2x risk 2x play 2x are 8x claims 2x

Local Revision: Wordiness

Original: The NFL employs hundreds, entertains millions, and essentially owns a day of the week. The league has built an impressive monopoly over the providing of the American’s population favorite sport, football. Their gargantuan headquarters standing tall in the heart of New York City is symbolic of the influence and pure hold the league holds over a vast majority of the American population. Following years of attempting to evade the concussion conversation, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell’s and the league’s negligence and ignorance proved to be their ultimate downfall when sued by current and former players regarding the issue. As stated in the sources’ synopses, this party has perhaps the largest share of stakes as made evident by its financial and ethical impact across the globe. A very large majority of the world’s population is familiar with the NFL depending on their access to television, the Internet, or any sort of media where the NFL is found in every corner. On the other hand, the players’ struggle between gamesmanship and livelihood defines their stance in the crisis. Many risk their lives with every loud thud of a hit but perceive their reputation and monetary compensation presides over all else. The tertiary stakeholder, with a retrospective and progressive outlook on the situation, are the medical evolutionists and technological innovators, which can be grouped together. Corporations such as Riddell and STAR are now pitted in a race for the coveted prize that can save a billion-dollar industry and they will consequentially be compensated in respect to the helpfulness of their innovation - the concussion-proof helmet. Fringe doctors, researchers, and leading medical evolutionists which may play a complementary role to this newfound desire for technological innovation are also an important stakeholder. Unlike the other stakeholders, this classification of involved parties are not dependent on the others and are operating on an independent basis.

Revised: The NFL, employer of thousands, entertainer of millions, and an owner of a day of the week. The National Football League is the globalized provider of the national pastime of football. The league's illustrious mammoth structure of a headquarters in the heart of New York City is symbolic of the influence it possesses in the world today. But, even the largest giant can fall. The NFL could no longer could hide from the ever-looming concussion controversy. Their ignorance and negligence had caught up to them. Now, the several millions of people subject to the NFL's popularity and monopoly could only watch from their televisions, smart phones, tablets, etc. as one of the world's biggest corporations finally had an enemy it could not even squash. The league finally had succumbed to the players' struggle between gamesmanship and livelihood as well as corporations', such as Riddell and STAR, lust for concussion-proof technology. Additionally, fringe doctors, leading medical evolutionists, technological innovators, all were now a part of this monumental crisis. Although the players and league may be directly associated, a whole other world of technology, media, and viewership held stakes in the NFL concussion controversy.

The revised paragraph is much more fluid and succinct and consequentially more powerful as a whole in describing the stakeholders of the NFL concussion controversy. I do believe it lost some eloquence with the deletion of grandiose wording but I now understand verbosity is not to be found in the conventions of a QRG. 

Peer Review 2

My assessment of David's video.



Things I Learned About My Own Project From Reviewing Different Genre
1. Importance of utilizing genre's conventions to best effectively deliver the message (purpose)
2. Vitality of introducing context to enhance purpose and audience's comprehension of the postmortem

Top 3 Problems:

1. Lack of visual components - assemble diagrams and message-sending diagrams
2. Extensive, verbose paragraphs - cut down, enhance flow of paragraphs
3. Not enough discussion of context (concurrent events) - discuss local, national, and global news stories and incorporate

Top 3 Strengths:

1. Flow of paragraphs - go through each paragraph and build upon transitions
2. Subheadings - perhaps incorporate more and using transitions introduce even more relevant information
3. Title - after viewing other titles, I recognize mine to achieve the desired effect as a hook and perhaps I will apply to my subheadings as well to keep the reader engaged

Peer Review 1

Peer review (rubric) for Jason Boley's rough draft.

After reviewing a peer's work (a QRG, the same genre I am utilizing for the controversy postmortem), I am relieved to the fact many of my peers are implementing the same conventions I have attempted to utilize. The Genre Examples for the Quick-Reference Guide were varied in structure, so I was curious to see if a classmate of mine had used the same conventions that I thought were consistent in all the QRGs or if I missed anything or if he saw something I did not. Considering my draft was purely textual, I planned on inserting media into my QRG to enhance the piece's delivery and effectiveness and seeing Jason's work gave me a necessary example. I am extremely content with the transitory subheadings and overall flow of my piece as well as the tone, diction, and syntax. Jason clearly identified stakeholders and what they had to lose or gain, which I wish to emulate. I believe the controversy is well-explained in my draft but the concerned parties' true stakes are not clearly identified so I wish to change that. His manipulation of font and pictures as well are something I will try to incorporate in my own piece. I enjoy the personal and relative tone I created in my piece but I need to increase the concreteness and professionalism in my writing, which I discovered after reading Jason's QRG. The diminutive appearance of the pictures disengaged me from Jason's draft, so I will be sure to make sure my pictures are relative and effective in size, vibrance, and overall delivery (appearance). I liked Jason's title in that it was vague so I did not know what the piece was going to discuss but it did not necessarily hook me, just made me draw a blank. I see that in my title as well, I need to find a good balance of direct statement of what is going to be discussed while appealing to an audience enough to make them want to read it because of a heightened desire for inquisition.

Draft of Project 1

This draft is very rough in that I am still assimilating content into the piece I am still revising the layout and language of the QRG.  It may seem choppy or nonsencial but I plan on inserting much-needed, advanced media to visually appeal the audience and enhance the argument. I had trouble converting the format and media I already had through Google Docs so the draft contains only textual, structural elements of what I plan to have in my final draft.

Stakeholder #3

The tertiary stakeholder, with a retrospective and progressive outlook on the situation, are the medical evolutionists and technological innovators, which can be grouped together. Corporations such as Riddell and STAR are now pitted in a race for the coveted prize that can save a billion-dollar industry and they will consequentially be compensated in respect to the helpfulness of their innovation - the concussion-proof helmet. Fringe doctors, researchers, and leading medical evolutionists which may play a complementary role to this newfound desire for technological innovation are also an important stakeholder. Unlike the other stakeholders, this classification of involved parties are not dependent on the others and are operating on an independent basis. The following emotional and credible quotes sum up the roles of these stakeholders in this concussion crisis:

"I wish I never met Mike Webster. CTE has driven me into the politics of science, the politics of the NFL. You can't go against the NFL. They will squash you." - Dr. Bennet Omalu

"The way football is being played currently, that I have seen, it's dangerous. It's dangerous and it could impact their long-term mental health. You only get one brain." - Dr. Ann McKee

"The NFL very directly worker, not only to get the brain to NIH, but in this case, to keep it away from Omalu's group or McKee's group by speaking badly about them" - Mark Fainaru-Wada

Stakeholder #2

"I want every person who leaves this to be as healthy as possible when they leave. We all give up stiffness in knees, backs, joint pain stuff. You don't want to give you your brain." Indianapolis Colts Center Jeff Saturday.

"A lot of people think we're gladiators, but we're human beings. We get injured and we've got the rest of our lives to worry about. Playing football is like a vapor it's here and it's gone and you still have the rest of your life to live." New York Jets Offensive Lineman Damien Woody.

“You get a concussion, they’ve got to take you out of the game. So if you can hide it and conceal it as much as possible, you pay for it the next day, but you’ll be able to… stay in the game.” Washington Redskins fullback Mike Sellers

These are the quotes that surmise the players' stakes in the NFL-concussion saga. Their internal struggle between gamesmanship and livelihood defines their stance in the crisis. Many risk their lives with every loud thud of a hit but perceive their reputation and monetary compensation presides over all else. The players, such as Chris Borland which is thoroughly discussed in my source, who value safety are the one antagonizing the stakes of the NFL.