The main way I chose to annotate or mark up my pages of reading are by underlining things I agree with, disagree with, confused on, or were just repeated. On the pages I selected I underlined three of those things. In this journal I did not really find any of these points or stories confusing. But I did underline things I agreed with, such as the story about how thousands of people were arrested doing sit-ins, without using any kind of social media. I believe that nobody needs social media for activism, and it is incredible how many people were able to do that without any kind of social media to contact each other. Then I disagreed that Twitter should get a noble peace prize award, because it was not the app itself, it was the people who came together and just so happened to find each other on Twitter. Lastly I just underlined anything that had to do with activism, especially the stories because I believe any of those are very helpful to just know. The examples of stories are especially helpful because they give evidence on what I am thinking. This tells me I am able to know my opinions on matters by being able to find things I agree and disagree with and draw those relationships together. These also helped challenge my ideas by finding evidence, or things I disagree with, for an argument that would be going against my own opinion. “The beginning of the journal really pulled me into the story. Then I thought it was weird how someone wanted twitter to get a Nobel peace prize even though it is not an actual living thing. It was really the people who were brought together through twitter and were able to stand up for freedom and democracy against Iran.” This was my response on the article when I first read it.