Reviewing your own website is easy; it’s easy to be your own critic. Reviewing someone else’s website? That can be a little bit more difficult. Although you come from a more objective perspective, it’s harder to find the things that they can work on. Doing the peer review gave me the chance to look at other people’s websites, instead of just focusing on mine 24/7. It was really cool to see what other people were writing about, and how they decided to go about creating their online selves.

It also relates to the course content from this week. In lecture, we talked about the process of editing. As I reviewed my peer’s website, I essentially had to go through the four stages of editing: substantive, stylistic, copyediting, and proofreading. During the substantive stage, I looked at the overall structure of the site, the content, the tone/online self, and how they all flowed to work together. In the more stylistic lens, I looked at how accessible the website was – in terms of word choice, and ability difference. During the copyediting and proofreading, I examined the posts for mechanical and typographical errors, as well as design and composition errors. As someone interested in the publishing industry, I think that this was an interesting activity.

In other news, the blog is going okay. I’ll admit that it has been hard to find the time to write – squeezing it in between course readings and other assignments. Thankfully, I have some other blog topics planned ahead, so I don’t have to stress too much about that. There’s a couple in particular that I’m really excited to write!