In the world today it is alarming the amount of information that can be traced back to an individual. This isn’t a hacker in the dead of night, this is tiny bits of information that can be acquired in broad daylight by unsuspecting characters. No, it’s not the neighborhood weirdo. The pride of American capitalism, the private companies, have been at the heart of the issue of the individual's privacy. In a world of exponentially advancing technology, the concern of the violation of citizen’s privacy is the in the forefront of everyone’s minds. However like most topics in America, the options on this issue are divided into two major sides. In, Who Has the Right to Track You? by David Sirota, the progressive activism journal In These Times, asks the …show more content…
The Greeks are renowned for creating the framework of writing, and ethos, pathos, and logos were the bread and butter of persuasion. Ethos appeals to the ethics of the reader, pathos appeals to the emotions, a logos appeals to the reader’s logic. Both articles use ethos in establishing the immorally of the violation of citizen’s privacy. In addition RT and Sirota both base opinions and arguments on valid facts. However, that’s where the two articles splinter off from one another. The RT article appeals to human paranoia and fear by depicting the scanners used to read license plates as an evil tool. The article comments, “Yet with few limits, there is little, if any, accountability regarding where and how repossession companies use the scanners”. This quotes is directly written to stimulate fear of the government, and doubt in the law makers’ actions in response to the problem. In contrast, Sirota doesn’t advocate for scanners or the use of individuals’ information by companies. Instead, he decides to not to persuade his readers by pure emotions but by mainly focusing in on logos and telling the issue from all