The “Nothing-to-Hide Argument” Analyzed: In this rhetorical analysis, I will be taking a look at Daniel J. Solove’s essay “The Nothing-to-Hide Argument,” which is about privacy in the context of personal information and government data collection (Solove 734). Solove’s main argument in his essay is that the general public has a narrow perception of what privacy really is. The purpose behind his main argument is to expose the problems with the nothing-to-hide argument while presenting a way to challenge it for his target audience, government officials. Solove’s argument to his target audience is effective through his exemplary use of substance, organization, and style in his essay. Solove’s great substance in his essay is due to the depth of his key points in his essay. He starts off with explaining the nothing-to-hide argument, which is this idea that if you have nothing to hide from government surveillance, you have nothing to fear (Solove 735). He then goes on to link this explanation of the nothing-to-hide-argument with his understanding of privacy. Solove’s understanding of privacy is that it does not have one singular essence that one can locate, but is made up of a plethora of different things that resemble …show more content…
These bullets are examples and responses to the nothing-to-hide argument. One such example is “Show me yours and I’ll show you mine (Solove 735).” Solove also makes use of some brilliant and precise words that add to his style. In particular, when Solove is describing the deeper problem with the nothing-to-hide argument, he explains that it is the fact that the nothing-to-hide argument “myopically” looks upon privacy as something one would want to hide (Solove 739). Such wording invokes curiosity in the reader, making the author’s argument more
Bill Nelson once said, “If we don’t act now to safeguard our privacy, we could all become victims of identity theft.” With the increasing amount of data that our mobile phones and tablets contain, encryption and security is becoming more vital everyday. Damon Beres, author of “What You Need To Know About Apple vs. The FBI” argues both sides as the war on privacy rights and national security continues. Although Beres uses a large amount of pathos throughout his article, he doesn’t use ethos and logos as much. When Beres does use logos and ethos though, he clearly states examples.
They also provided information in a way to influence their reader’s inferences. The information that is presented by
Edward Snowden perfectly sums up the thought process behind the rejection of the mass surveillance: “Privacy isn’t about something to hide. Privacy is about something to protect… freedom of speech doesn’t mean much if you can’t have a quiet space… arguing that you don’t have privacy because you have nothing to hide is like arguing that you don’t care about free speech because you have nothing to say.” (Document 2). The point of view is from an ardent Libertarian that has contributed to Ron Paul’s campaign numerous times. Edward Snowden firmly believes in the right to self.
Some Americans believe that the Patriot Act is a violation of privacy, but the government takes crucial steps to ensure the privacy of all law-abiding Americans. Despite contrary beliefs, the
The average man, though he longs for freedom, feels the need to be safe. People naturally wish to have the freedom to act on things, believe in things or say things, but, they want themselves and their families to be safe while doing so. Alongside the need for safety, man has a need for privacy. People tend to react negatively to others digging into their personal lives, creating a want for their own privacy in life. This subconscious need for safety and privacy has always trumped man’s desire for absolute freedom.
Snowden demonstrated the same beliefs as those stated in “Blue’s Ain’t No Mockin Bird.” As Bambara demonstrated through the use of symbolism and metaphor, and as Marlon Brando stated, privacy should not be given to a select few, but rather should be given to
To further support this, information that is collected is used to protect the Nation from "threats.” (2.1)Since this information is used to protect the Nation from “threats,” not to intrude on everyday citizen’s privacy, it is not an invasion of their right to privacy. Correspondingly, part of protecting citizen’s privacy is requiring a probable cause for
Nowadays, “privacy” is becoming a popular conversation topic. Many people believe that if they do not do anything wrong in the face of technology and security, then they have nothing to hide. Professor Daniel J. Solove of George Washington University Law School, an internationally known expert in privacy law, wrote the article Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’, published in The Chronicle of Higher Education in May of 2011. Solove explains what privacy is and the value of privacy, and he insists that the ‘nothing to hide’ argument is wrong in this article. In the article, “Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have ‘Nothing to Hide’”, Daniel J. Solove uses ethos, pathos, and logos effectively by using strong sources, using
Taking the privacy away may have resulted in less outbreaks of crime, but it also took away their freedom. Today, society accepts and allows much more privacy. People do not constantly listen in on the conversations held in the privacy of the public’s secure houses. Although cameras surround everybody, they secure the safety of others. Feelings remain private, too.
An individual’s privacy has been a right since the nineteenth century, when Samuel D. Warren and Louis D. Brandeis, a Supreme Court Justice published their article “The Right to Privacy” in 1890, which proposed the general right to privacy, under common law. Before their article, in the United States there was no legal right to privacy, however after the article was published and the legal right to privacy was established, many courts applied it to several cases that dealt with privacy matters. In the Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 48 S. Ct. 564, 72 L. Ed. 944 (1928) case, Louis D. Brandeis created the legal right “to be let alone”, which became the most cherished right to individuals in society. Moreover, “the constitutional right
Phrasing his argument in that way encourages his audience to read the intriguing article to its
The author included these situations to appeal to emotion. This draws a broader audience to convince that his argument is
Rhetorical Analysis of Glenn Greenwald’s “Why Privacy Matters”1 Is privacy important? In Glenn Greenwald’s TED talk “Why Privacy Matters,” he explains how important privacy truly is. He uses examples from people’s day to day lives and makes viewers think about if their privacy really matters. Greenwald’s speech takes place after the Edward Snowden files, which he reported about, and is passionate about keeping private citizens private.
This first sentence in the passage immediately makes the reader wonder about the setting and what’s going on. In other words, the author W.W. Jacobs grabs the reader’s attention by making the readers think and be curious about
Technology is growing at a fast pace and every day we see a new product or service that is available. Many times it is hard to even keep up with the latest phone, computer, game console, or software. There are so many different gadgets to choose from and even the internet is on information overload. As a result, we can no longer truly expect to have privacy.