“Unframing Models of Public Distribution: From Rhetorical Situation to Rhetorical Ecologies” was written by Jenny Edbauer, who is an Associate Professor of Writing, Rhetoric, and Digital Media at the University of Kentucky. The article was published in Rhetoric Society Quarterly in 2005. Since it was published in this academic journal, the primary audience is academics in the field of rhetoric.
The text’s primary rhetorical purposes are to inform and to persuade. Edbauer is trying to inform other academics about her view on how rhetoric should be understood, and to persuade them to incorporate this view into their studies. Her main argument is that rhetoric should be studied in the context of broader “rhetorical ecologies” rather than only through “rhetorical situations”. Rhetorical ecologies focus on the fluid connections between the elements of rhetorical situations (audience, speaker, text, exigence, and constraints) rather than seeing them as distinct parts. Edbauer writes “I look towards a framework of affective ecologies that recontextualizes rhetorics in their temporal, historical, and lived fluxes” (Edbauer, 9). This means that it is important to also look into factors that do not fit into the categories of a rhetorical situation, such as the experience of the audience, the other events and rhetorics occurring at the time, how the rhetoric spread and evolved, how it was written, etc.
At the end of the article, Edbauer gives her definition of rhetoric, explaining how it is not limited to the elemental properties of the text, but the importance lies in “the material effects and processes” and how the text “engage[s] with the living, hooking into the processes that are already in play” (Edbauer, 23). Throughout the piece, as she explains what rhetorical ecologies are, she demonstrates how rhetoric has to be understood through the living and changing connections it has with the world around it and the people who engage with it.
Molly's Rhetoric Blog 
I really enjoyed this blog post and thought you did a great job with it. I personally found Edbauer to be difficult to read and felt that my blog post lacked structure and relevant context. However, you seemed to really understand the text and your analysis helped me to further understand it. I was unable to find Edbauer’s definition of rhetoric, but after reading your findings and the class discussion toad, I agree with what you found. I also agree with your analysis of the purpose and audience of the text.
LikeLike