1. Visual Communication: “Literacy means more than words, and visual literacy means more than play” (George 16).
Visual communication is more than just using visuals to complement a text or speech, it can be analyzed to draw specific conclusions of its own. With mass media growing rapidly, it is important to understand how to read and interpret visuals. Learning how to understand the components of visual literacy, such as composition and design, of visuals make stronger writers.

2. Cultural Theory: “They connected the visual arts very directly with the world of language” (George 23).
John Berger’s Ways of Seeing was seen was a breakthrough to many teachers that wanted to incorporate cultural theory. It was a way to argue the image’s analysis and to say that an image does not have a ‘fixed reality’, allowing visual a place in the classroom for discussions. Another example of this would be how William Costanzo reports film composition as an equal partner to writing, instead of a way to aid writing. It is important to realize that the visuals that are created hold value and can be view in the same sense as text.

3. Visual Argument: “Does make an overt claim, assertion, or proposition that draws particularly on comparison, juxtaposition, and intertextuality to offer the assertion to an audience for acceptance. But visual arguments do not need to be parodic” (George 29).
A visual argument is very similar to a visual parody, where there is a claim that then develops with the visual information given. George does not believe that a visual argument must be completely nonverbal, but it should be the main focus. The overall composition of the visual can be supported with literacy, such as how literacy and be supported with images.

Multiliteracies is a new term coined by the New London Group in order to address the melting pot of languages within a society. There are two parts to multiliteracies, “the first argument engages with the multiplicity of communications channels and media; the second with the increasing salience of cultural and linguistic diversity” (Cope, Kalantzis 5). The first part being that the world is rapidly changing as more cultures are recognized through the media, which leads to the second part of creating social diversity. Communications are changing and becoming more connected to the world globally instead of locally, so there cannot be a fixed standard that encapsulates all literacy learning.

1. Literacy Pedagogy: “traditionally this has meant teaching and learning to read and write in page-bound, official, standard forms of the national language” (Cope, Kalantzis 9).
As the quote states, traditionally literacy pedagogy meant learning one standard language. This was in order to create learning conditions so that there is equal social participation. Now knowing this, the definition needs to be broaden to fully understand context of cultures and the linguistic diversity as it is today.

2. Civil Pluralism: “Access to wealth, power, and symbols must be possible no matter what identity markers, such as language, dialect, and register, a person happens to have” (Cope, Kalantzis 15).
Multiliteracies is about creating a social diversity through communications, whereas civil pluralism is the ability to be presented in the society without discrimination. This is the result of successful multitiliteracies within a society.

3. Metalanguage: “A language for talking about language, images, texts and meaning-making interactions” (Cope, Kalantzis 24).
Metalanguage should be used to recognize and properly describe the distinction between texts in order to relate it back to the context of cultures. Although metalanguage still needs to have some set criteria, it should be flexible in the way it can be taught, such as through a variety of tools. This then creates a design for understanding of concepts within that culture.

Digital rhetoric has a long struggle to be defined to just one field due it having an analytic method or heuristic for production side to it. This is partly due to rhetoric having various definitions by itself, making it such a wide topic. The other reason is because of the changing times where rhetoric transitioned from its original use of public speaking, to private discussions and now digitally. Richard Lanham coined the term ‘digital rhetoric’ and began understanding how the digital movement affected rhetoric. Eyman states that the definition can be simplified, “as the application of rhetorical theory to digital text and performances” (13).

2. Text “A communicative event that meets seven specific criteria of textuality: cohesion, coherence, intentionality, acceptability, informality, situationally, and intertextuality” (Eyman 21).
Eyman expresses that he thought that text was a limited term, until he started working with it. Much like rhetoric, the word text has undergone a change due to the advancing technology and times. Text began with print media, but overtime it has become much more than that with multiple different standards of what text is defined as. It is important to understand what is general criteria of text is and how it has expanded past print text.

3. Intertextuality “Align theories and methods of classical and contemporary rhetoric to network texts and new media as objects of study” (Eyman 34).
This section starts off with an explanation from Warnick saying that digital text is to different from print text to be grouped together and will need to be adjusted. While Eyman agrees it will need to be adjusted, he believes, “it is not a sufficient answer in terms of developing digital rhetoric as a field” (Eyman 34). This is important to realize because intertextuality should encompass all text and create new theories and method from it.