In the earlier class, we created our issue mapping based on our issue. Because each of our position is different, so we made a big map which covered our own topic. After that we start to analyses the relationship between issue and stakeholders. We were thinking them from human and non-human. I do think this is a very useful step for our research. We could easily see what other’s topics are clearly then we could develop ours more.
In the class, we are required to make a word system “word associations” which I would prefer to call it like a word info collection game. We were working in a group with our issue Obesity and healthy living. We wrote about 75 words totally and finally we chose 5 words for our issue which are profit, discriminate, food packaging, planning, imbalance. We discussed a lot in our group. Then we selected some words and arrange them as different direction which are divisive, unclear definition, emotive and factual. The result was very interesting I think. We also arranged words as influence form heavy to light. This was make sense to our issue. We can find what we need form these mapping. These words were like a data list.
This exercise we were focusing on the stakeholders we listed before. This task would involve our concepts of our own direction. The foundation map based on specific issues for our different obesity directions. This is a very basic but useful research I think. We tried to analyses our issue form these points. The polemic map we made is for controversial subject based on our topic. There were four topics, which were sugar tax revenue, obesity personal responsibility, disgusted or supportive and children obesity who responsible. Then we selected one of them to map from related stakeholder. From this task, we can easily see the contradiction. And also the interesting thing is we could find some different view of the issue so that we can develop our direction more. The controversy actors map is also useful for us. We detailed each sections and see more info from them.