Free Essay

Chicanary

In: English and Literature

Submitted By merrillx3
Words 1179
Pages 5
Socialization of Confidentiality: Axiom or Chicanery In today’s culture sequestration of information has become pervasive. It is prevalent on a daily basis, whether from social networking sites, search engines, or Internet Service Providers. There primary basis of procuring information is HTTP cookies, flash cookies, and ever cookies. In his October 2014 lecture “Why Privacy Matters”, Journalist and New York Times best seller Glenn Greenwald disputes the notion that aggregated observation only affects those divulging in acts of misconduct. He dissertates that the internet has oscillated into an anomalous realm of accumulative, unsystematic vigilance. There is a prevalent tendency that originates in this controversy, amidst a society who is distressed with accumulative surveillance, which states “there is no real harm that comes from this large-scale invasion because only people who are engaged in bad acts have a reason to want to hide and to care about their privacy (Greenwald para.3).” Throughout his speech, Greenwald creates an ethical appeal to the audience as he focuses on innate ethos. Greenwald introduces the notion. "I don't really worry about invasions of privacy because I don't have anything to hide (Greenwald para. 6).” In his May 2011 article “Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’”, Author and Law Professor Daniel J. Solove disputes that the controversy surrounding the socialization of confidentiality involves more than just individuals suppressing erroneous activities. Solove quotes Nobel Prize winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, who declared “everyone is guilty of something or has something to conceal. All one has to do is look hard enough to find what it is (Solvo para.6).” These statements correlate the title and strengthen credence between Solove, Greenwald and there congregation. . As within “How to write anything: A Guide and Reference composed by John J. Ruszkiewicz and Jay T. Dolmage, Ethos is defined as “the appeal to character (Ruszkiewicz and Dolmage page 260)”, exemplified by the use of intellect, integrity, unbiased, and plausible. In order to establish a relationship and sway the congregation Mr. Solove as well as Mr. Greenwald began invigorating their heeded meritorious character by varying between the two antagonistic perspectives; effectively justifying that they are unbiased. He justly analyzes the reasoning behind the nothing-to-hide controversy, creating an impression of benevolence amongst Greenwald and the audience. Greenwald’s dialogue is primarily fixated on establishing a moralistic overture to his congregation. He emphasizes his ethos throughout his lecture by first, controlling the rhetorical separation amidst himself and the audience, and secondly, by speaking in an efficacious tone. In an effort to broaden his congregation and incorporate global commonwealth, Greenwald elucidates how confidentiality burdens are not just affiliated with American bureaucracy, but are an international avocation of controversy. Greenwald further establishes his argument by demonstrating his scholarly credence and depicting his dexterity into the historical and international rhetoric regarding sequestration affairs. As within “How to write anything: A Guide and Reference composed by John J. Ruszkiewicz and Jay T. Dolmage, logos is defined as “the appeal to reason and evidence (Ruszkiewicz and Dolmage page 261) ”, exemplified by the use of certainty, evidence, attestation, and satisfying logic. Greenwald shapes his logos by presenting the audience with two analogies. The first analogy is based on George Orwell’s, Nineteen Eighty-Four, which Greenwald states "There was, of course, no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment." He went on to say, "At any rate, they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live, did live, from habit that became instinct, in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard and except in darkness every movement scrutinized (Greenwald para.10).” The Orwell analogy focuses on the misuse of vigilance, such as reticence and social control. The congregation is then conferred with the second analogy, “The Abrahamic religions similarly posit that there's an invisible, all-knowing authority who, because of its omniscience, always watches whatever you're doing, which means you never have a private moment, the ultimate enforcer for obedience to its dictates (para.11).” By endorsing these historically distinguished writings respecting the controversies of government vigilance and the accumulation of documentation, it is ingrained that the controversy of confidentiality immunity has formerly been a matter of dispute and that his own squabble is more comprehensive. Greenwald commences his adjudication with the intent of constructing his pathos. His communication metamorphosed into more climactic and, impassioned language, such as the mindset that “only people who are doing something wrong have things to hide and therefore reasons to care about privacy (Greenwald para.3).” Due to this change in dialect the congregation identifies with Greenwald’s point of view and they become apprehensive of the urgency associated with said actions. Greenwald begins appealing to the audience’s imagination by mentioning “plotting a terrorist attack (Greenwald para.3).” or “engaging in violent criminality (Greenwald para.3).” Then he begins getting personal in order to invoke feelings of unease within the audience by offering his email address, he entices the congregation then requests they “email him the passwords to all of your email accounts, not just the nice, respectable work one in your name, but all of them, because I want to be able to just troll through what it is you're doing online, read what I want to read and publish whatever I find interesting. After all, if you're not a bad person, if you're doing nothing wrong, you should have nothing to hide (para.6).” As stated in the publication “How to write anything: A Guide and Reference composed by John J. Ruszkiewicz and Jay T. Dolmage, pathos is defined as “the emotional appeal(Ruszkiewicz and Dolmage page 260) ”, exemplified by the use of tenacious perception to reinforce its point of view. In order to establish a relationship and sway the audience, Greenwald intensely succumbs to the audience’s compassions and perceptibility. Greenwald devotedly appeals to the audience’s distinctiveness and self-reflectiveness. This is accomplished by examining the viable ramifications the audience could encounter if the government is allowed to continue compiling and stockpiling privy information. The effective use of Ethos, Pathos, and Logos and the apprehensive arrangement of his speech, Greenwald persuaded the audience that the nothing-to-hide controversy is a precarious, discriminatory way of conceiving privacy. Greenwald manages his rhetorical distance between himself and the audience while constructing a relationship and establishing his jurisdiction, while not portraying himself as a superior. He establishes his credibility through illustrations of literature and quotations from experts. Through climactic and, impassioned language Greenwald was able to plea to the audience’s sympathies and imagination and leave them with the reminder that the Socialization of Confidentiality is truly an Axiom. References
Greenwald, G. (2014) “Why Privacy Matters” Ted World.
Retrieved from: http://www.ted.com/talks/glenn_greenwald_why_privacy_matters/transcript?language=en
Solvo, D. (2011) Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have 'Nothing to Hide’ The Chronicle for Higher Education.
Retrieved from: http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.library.csn.edu/docview/867513086?pq-origsite=summon Ruszkiewicz J. and Dolmage J. (2012) “How to write anything: A Guide and Reference”
Retrieved from:
College Level Text Book…...

Similar Documents