One of the most powerful strategies used in literature and media is rhetoric. There are three types of rhetoric: pathos (appeal to emotion), logos (appeal to logic), and ethos (writer’s credibility). Writers use rhetoric in their writing to persuade the reader to believe their opinion. In Edward W. Felten’s “The Tech Industry Needs to Step Up on Privacy Disclosures” and Gina Trapani’s “Online Consumers Should Make Their Needs Known”, both incorporate convincing uses of rhetoric in their articles; however, Trapani’s use of rhetoric exceeds Felten’s and will persuade the reader more certainly because she backs up her article with her personal credibility, strives to pull at the reader’s emotion, and assures the reader’s question through general …show more content…
Felten incorporates logos when claiming, “Privacy shouldn’t be all or nothing. Adult users, and parents on behalf of their kids, should be empowered to decide how to trade off privacy against function and convenience”. Felten draws in the reader through logic because he knows how important privacy is for the parents of kids who use apps. He makes his argument simple but logical. Every parent now days have kids who constantly use applications and all parents want their kids to have privacy. He is simple to the point and hardly needs to say more because logically every parent will agree with his statement. One problem with Felten’s argument is he never gives the reader a way to react to these apps. He persuades the reader to believe the same viewpoint he does but never gives them a way to make a difference, or even more important, protect their kids. Instead of targeting the industry he should aim to help the reader find ways to receive privacy. Trapani warns its readers when she instructs them to, “arm yourself and your kids with a healthy skepticism about how apps treat you and your information. Choose to use apps and services that notify you, in plain language, what information they collect and why”. Trapani presents the problem and offers a solution for readers. Like Felten she shows that there is a problem but also helps the reader by giving them an answer. The common reader will not be able to make changes in the application making process, which Trapani knows, but they can be aware of the danger and look to avoid putting themselves in situations where they lose privacy. Her argument is clear and simple, which is perfect for the common app user who may not be an expert. She persuades the reader easily because her argument is logical; demand privacy and be aware that each app may not give