The issue of invasion of privacy, especially in the different methods employed to ensure safety, affect innocent people and are sometimes not even effective. This issue is addressed in “Trading Liberty” by Wendy Kaminer, which was published in The Free Inquiry in 2002 after the 9/11 events. Kaminer, other than having written several books is also a lawyer. On the other hand, the issue is also acknowledge in the article, “If Looks Could Kill” written by The Economist, which is a weekly magazine in which most authors are anonymous. Still, it is widely recognized for its perspective in economic issues, current affairs, technology, etc. In this article, the author uses tone and facts to support her claim that the use of surveillance camera is not
…show more content…
To introduce her article, Kaminer uses an aggressive tone. “Only a fool with no sense of history would have been sanguine about the prospects for civil liberties after September 11 attacks” In this example we can see that her choice of words such a “sanguine” make reference to her aggressive tone. Never the less this tone catches the reader as it is her first sentence, and it aids to make her point more relevant. Her tone makes the readers realize that the topic is a serious matter especially when you take into consideration the context, it was written a few months after 9/11 so her tone makes it appropriate after a time of chaos. Whereas, The Economist uses a chatty tone “Monitoring surveillance is a tedious work”. His approach to the subject is intimate and even sarcastic when he makes reference to the couple that is waiting for their love ones. Although this tone makes him more relatable considering the context, which is financial crisis, this issue was not as important and therefore a satirical tone was a way to get the readers attention but it also makes the audience feel less concern for it. Therefore the aggressive tone employed by Kaminer makes her intentions more effective than the sarcastic tone employed by The …show more content…
In regard to Kaminer, she used reports by the American Civil Liberties. An example is the one that says that never did the facial recognition system identified a person whose picture was in the database of the Tampa police department. By using this report Kaminer demonstrates that her point have credibility, especially for the ones who are familiar with the ACL. However, The Economist instead of using the facts as logos, like Kaminer did, he uses it as pathos by relying on expert’s arguments such as what Judee Burgoon argues that the technology that analyzes micro-expressions needs to be enhanced with different cultural variations. When they rely on expert’s arguments it makes it trustable, because we believe that experts have an extensive knowledge on the subject therefore it gives credibility. Although it gives credibility, The Economist bases almost all their ideas on this expert’s opinion to a point where it starts to loose the value of employing this method. Although Kaminer didn’t rely on experts her logos was more convincing than The Economist use of pathos. The Economist overuses the technique by going to far in the backgrounds of the different
To introduce her article, Kaminer uses an aggressive tone. “Only a fool with no sense of history would have been sanguine about the prospects for civil liberties after September 11 attacks” In this example we can see that her choice of words such a “sanguine” make reference to her aggressive tone. Never the less this tone catches the reader as it is her first sentence, and it aids to make her point more relevant. Her tone makes the readers realize that the topic is a serious matter especially when you take into consideration the context, it was written a few months after 9/11 so her tone makes it appropriate after a time of chaos. Whereas, The Economist uses a chatty tone “Monitoring surveillance is a tedious work”. His approach to the subject is intimate and even sarcastic when he makes reference to the couple that is waiting for their love ones. Although this tone makes him more relatable considering the context, which is financial crisis, this issue was not as important and therefore a satirical tone was a way to get the readers attention but it also makes the audience feel less concern for it. Therefore the aggressive tone employed by Kaminer makes her intentions more effective than the sarcastic tone employed by The …show more content…
In regard to Kaminer, she used reports by the American Civil Liberties. An example is the one that says that never did the facial recognition system identified a person whose picture was in the database of the Tampa police department. By using this report Kaminer demonstrates that her point have credibility, especially for the ones who are familiar with the ACL. However, The Economist instead of using the facts as logos, like Kaminer did, he uses it as pathos by relying on expert’s arguments such as what Judee Burgoon argues that the technology that analyzes micro-expressions needs to be enhanced with different cultural variations. When they rely on expert’s arguments it makes it trustable, because we believe that experts have an extensive knowledge on the subject therefore it gives credibility. Although it gives credibility, The Economist bases almost all their ideas on this expert’s opinion to a point where it starts to loose the value of employing this method. Although Kaminer didn’t rely on experts her logos was more convincing than The Economist use of pathos. The Economist overuses the technique by going to far in the backgrounds of the different