A mixed methods approach was used for the organization and analysis of this collection and study. For the most part, the study of the cards is qualitative in nature. I coded the literature review for rhetorical meaning from the text and images, the discourse community including the use of Q code and technical language, and the broader community which exhibits continued relationships. This type of coding was necessary to answer the research questions:

• What is the rhetorical meaning of these cards?

• How do the cards assist in forming a discourse community and community-at-large?

• What is the significance and meaning of how the cards are designed with their text and image?

 

Additionally, some quantitative elements where applied in the analysis of the cards. Because I only analyzed eight of the 140 QSL cards in the collection, quantitative analysis was needed to compare these chosen cards to the rest of the collection. This quantitative comparison of the entire collection was necessary to show that the analyzed cards were indicative of the collection as a whole. For instance, when analyzing the balance of the Tokyo, Japan card, I counted how many of the 140 cards included frames on them. Comparing and contrasting the analyzed cards to the collection as a whole assists the reader in making judgments about the balance of the interaction of text and image in this example.

           

To perform the qualitative analysis, I relied on the scholarship of C.K. Ogden and I.A. Richards for their studies on rhetoric; Gunther Kress, Charlotte Gunawardena et al, and Michael Nevradakis for their papers on community; Lester Faigley and P.K. Manning and Betsy Cullum-Swan for their research into social semiotics; and Anne O’Keefe, Jan-Ola Östman, and John Swales for their research on discourse. In addition, I used Östman's and O'Keefe's ideas about private and non-private audiences. These scholars laid the foundation upon which I built my analysis. So, although the research I used from others is not unprecedented, applying them to a collection of QSL cards from the 1920s and ‘30s is a new approach and a new avenue off study. Of note, because of the broad number of lenses which I chose to study, each card in the analysis was not analyzed for each theory. Instead, I focused upon one or two theories for each card to eliminate redundancy. 

           

I focused upon the rhetorical implications, community formation, and discourse to define the aspects of the QSL cards. These three points are used in my qualitative analysis. When first glancing at the collection, one can tell many similarities. Most of the cards exhibit large call numbers in the center of the card with some type of design, whether a photo, a drawing, or stylized font of the pre-printed text. Furthermore, the QSL cards exhibited mainly English text mixed in with Q Code. (Two of the cards were written in French with Q Codes and one is written in Norwegian with Q Code.)  Examining the cards for their rhetorical meaning and looking for signs of community within the QSL cards based upon the use of a common language and upon the text, images and the relationship between the two is the definitive basis for this study.

           

In addition, the ham operators ultimately, based upon their design choice and use of language, create a rhetorical meaning which is exhibited on the cards. The sections of the QSL cards in which I describe community and discourse are descriptive coding, and the rhetorical meaning is more applied in nature. I use what is written and the images to describe what the ham operator, or the sender, may mean. I also based my analysis of the rhetoric of the cards on Richards’ definition which describes rhetoric as a “philosophic enquiry into how words work in discourse” (4). Richards also viewed “persuasion as only one of the many aims of rhetoric,” and I view the cards as having a sense of persuasion in the manner of the operators’ ethos (16). The operators’ word choice of the pre-printed and written text and the images displays the character and beliefs of the sender. This ethos helps to inform the recipient as to the sender’s values.

           

Because of the synthesis of image and text in addition to the community which is formed by those who exchange the QSL cards, social semiotics is the broad umbrella under which I analyzed the cards. As written previously, social semiotics, per Kress, is the “theory that deals with meaning in all its appearances, in all social occasions, and in all cultural sites” (Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication 2). Therefore, I approached the cards noticing the interaction among the images, colors, fonts, borders, symbols, and text to analyze the meaning exhibited. I also applied the concepts of working with text and images of Faigley et al. The concepts I used for analyzing the QSLs, of the eleven concepts originally introduced, are balance, classification, description, emphasis, and proportion (Faigley et al. 26, 28, 32, 34, 44).    

           

One cannot ignore the discourse that is occurring between the operators which exhibits itself and further defines the community with its use of code. To analyze the discourse, I used Östman’s essay defining postcards as media discourse and Anne O’Keefe’s definition of media discourse. I also applied the six criteria which Swales established for a discourse community which are: a community of interest, participatory mechanisms, information exchange, genre-specific discoursal expectations, specialized language, and a critical mass of expertize (13).

           

Finally, I analyzed the community which is exhibited from the QSL cards. I used Kress’ aims of a social-semiotic theory of communication for a community, Rogan’s linear and circular information routes of messages, and his characterization of a ritual. Rogan claims that a ritual has repetition, institutionalization, and expressivity (16).

             

Web Design

​

From the start, I wanted to present my findings via an electronic medium. I feel that the electronic connection between the radio realm and of a digital process is the most appropriate; it is a nod to the technical ability of the ham operators and an extension of the digital process that radio introduced. Additionally, a website is more interactive between the user and the creator. I aimed to create a similar type of discourse between me and the reader as the QSL exchangers had: delivering information with space, color, text, and font choices along with the ability to read and wander about the website as desired. I also want my readers to experience the full color and design at the size they need. Unlike on the historical QSL cards in this study, I've included my email in the Links and FYI section so that readers can send me comments about the site. The web medium which I chose, although not ideal, is also a great way to share the information with those in the ham community.

           

The first card in the analysis section is a blank sample card explaining the sections of a QSL card so that the reader can easily distinguish the sections on the other cards. All the cards in the collection exhibit evidence of rhetorical meaning, discourse, and community by the text, the images, and the relationship between both and except for the Reno, NV and Shanghai, China cards, the eight cards chosen show the clear evidence of rhetorical meaning, discourse, and community. The Reno and Shanghai cards, numbers 5 and 8, have more obscure images and/or text and additional research as to what their images and text meant needed to be completed. Inclusion of these eight cards doesn't indicate, however, that the other cards in the collection are less decorated or have less obvious discourse or that others weren't as puzzling. Many of them are colorful and have intricate borders and additional written discourse and some of them are just as obscure in meaning as the China card. There was no specific purpose for choosing four American cards and four international cards.

           

Limitations

           

Obvious limitations occur when studying material which is almost 100 years old. My grandfather is not alive to assist me with any interpretations I’ve made about the community or discourse or to confirm guesses I’ve made about dates and places. I also do not participate with the Q code language or the ham radio community to the extent that I could consider myself a part of that community; I’m not a part of their community discourse of then or now. I have relied on literature published by those in the ham community to assist in mitigating this limitation. I made sure the material I used by Cordella, the ARRL, F1JXQ, Dunnehoo, DLS Reports, Haring, Hirschy, Lewis, Maxwell, and Nevradakis were all verified with one another.

           

Similarly, I am making assertions based upon a limited set of cards. Despite having 140 of them from over a ten year period, the assertions I am making are based upon these cards and may not represent the whole of QSL cards and ham radio. I do believe, however, that this collection could be used to make conjectures about other cards from that time period and that this collection could inspire additional research.  

           

In addition, there is always a chance of misinterpretation when applying modern theories to historic documents. One has to question whether people in the past, if aware of semiotics, would choose the images and text they did. This is especially important to note when the technical information which is conveyed by the QSLs could simply be relayed via text. The images, colors, and designs along with the quotes about the place from which the ham operators originate are all additional information relayed that has nothing to do with the radio exchange. However, it has been shown throughout time that humans have used images and text to establish their ethos, and in the examples in this collection, the operators have simply followed the history of others: they use text and image to form an idea of who they are and where they’re from. They do this to form relationships and establish discourse whether or not it was meant for discourse at the time or discourse 100 years in the future.

​