Glenn Greenwald, a talented and widely read columnist on civil liberties for the Guardian newspaper, failed in his attempt to alarm his readers to the flagrant and widespread violations of American privacy. Although his article was full of facts, documentation, and quotes from top rank officials, the article did not convey any sense of wrong doing or outrage. Rather it was dull, lacked passion and a sense of persuasion. In fact, the only attention grabbing part in the whole article is the title.
Greenwald is currently contributing to The Guardian. The Guardian is an English newspaper digital US edition established in 2011. It is the third most widely read online newspaper. The Guardian as well as Greenwald writes for the politically savvy. Before he started with the Guardian, he was Constitutional lawyer and enjoyed that occupation until he realized he did not want to protect those people but rather sue them. After quitting that he eventually wound up writing for The Salon. He went to George Washington University and then went to Graduate School at New York University Law School (Testa). Greenwald is neither a Democrat nor a republican. He is opposed to big government and he is against the expansion of presidential powers. Greenwald is a very educated man who has won many awards for his journalism. Eric Snowden, NSA whistle blower risked not only his job but his life, breaking silence about the mass surveillance and trusted Glenn Greenwald with the information showing that Greenwald has credibility. However, with this particular article, Greenwald left out vital information that would make this article grab the /more headlines. For instance he does not give any reason why the readers should be angry. Most people will say somethin...
... middle of paper ...
... that article to me and all the other readers so an exceptionally good writer such as Greenwald should have known not to write such a vague, and boring article.
The audience is not convinced even slightly. This article is too long and has too many dry facts, many of which do not get explained well, and wobbly quotes. He makes it seem as if he is against the NSA’s abuse of power, yet he includes a stat that helps out the NSA’s cause which is confusing. He does not tell the audience what they should do with the new information nor does he include why he is writing it. The paper really suffered from a lack of pathos. There was no emotional pull at all in the article which was the reason for his ultimately boring and tiring paper.
Works Cited
Testa, Jessica. "How Glenn Greenwald became Glenn Greenwald." buzzfeed.com. buzzfeed Inc. , 26 Jun 2013. Web. 17 Sep 2013.
Kevin M. Gallagher. 2013. Freedom of the Press Foundation. Glenn Greenwald, NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden: 'I don't want to live in a society that does these sort of things'. Video file posted on YouTube on June 9, 2013.
Edward Snowden is America’s most recent controversial figure. People can’t decide if he is their hero or traitor. Nevertheless, his leaks on the U.S. government surveillance program, PRISM, demand an explanation. Many American citizens have been enraged by the thought of the government tracing their telecommunication systems. According to factbrowser.com 54% of internet users would rather have more online privacy, even at the risk of security (Facts Tagged with Privacy). They say it is an infringement on their privacy rights of the constitution. However, some of them don’t mind; they believe it will help thwart the acts of terrorists. Both sides make a good point, but the inevitable future is one where the government is adapting as technology is changing. In order for us to continue living in the new digital decade, we must accept the government’s ability to surveil us.
Cassidy, John. "Why Edward Snowden Is a Hero." The New Yorker. N.p., 10 June 2013. Web. 15 Feb.
In May of 2013 Edward Snowden who was then working at a National Security Agency office in Oahu, Hawaii began copying top secret documents that belonged to the American government as he believed the documentation contained unethical and immoral content that he believed the American people and the world in general needed to know about. (Snowden, 2014) The documentation that he collated contained information regarding projects such as Prism, which is a top secret NSA surveillance program that has the ability to access the data servers of some of America's large...
...r reading this article will not be persuaded by her writing since it is emotion based, and not factual. The support that she brings is very specific, she does not have any general information. By including more supporting references, the author would have created a stronger and more believable article.
Scheer, Robert. "Edward Snowden Is Not a 'Traitor' and Glenn Greenwald Is Not an 'Accomplice' | The Nation." Edward Snowden Is Not a 'Traitor' and Glenn Greenwald Is Not an 'Accomplice' | The Nation. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Feb. 2014.
Edward Snowden, the famous “whistleblower”, shocked the world with his revelations about the NSA’s database and the programs which allow the organization to access personal information not only of citizens of other nations, but also of citizens of the U.S. The most shocking revelation of all was not the existence of these programs, but the fact that the Obama administration allowed those programs to exist in direct violation of every U.S. citizen’s right to privacy.
Edward Snowden, the former National Security Agency (N.S.A) subcontractor turned whistle-blower is nothing short of a hero. His controversial decision to release information detailing the highly illegal ‘data mining’ practices of the N.S.A have caused shockwaves throughout the world and have raised important questions concerning how much the government actually monitors its people without their consent or knowledge. Comparable to Mark Felt in the Watergate scandals, Daniel Ellsberg with the Pentagon Papers, Edward Snowden joins the rank of infamous whistleblowers who gave up their jobs, livelihood, and forever will live under scrutiny of the public all in the service to the American people. Edward Snowden released information detailing the extent of the N.S.A breaches of American privacy and in doing so, became ostracized by the media and barred from freely reentering America, his home country.
What makes an article great? Is it the amazement and awe that someone gets from learning something intriguing and new? Or is it how it withstands the test of time? There are many factors that goes into an amazing article and when an article does not meet all of those criteria, are they a complete failure? The article, “Opinions and Social Pressure” by Solomon Asch, published in Scientific American in 1955, was an amazing discovery. After completing research on past experiments that were similar to his own, Asch conducted an experiment that was revolutionary. With eight subjects in total for each experiment, Asch tested the effect social pressure has on an individual. Seven
What are the major points of the article and why do you think they are main
The United States government is up to its ears in the personal information it has collected from its citizens. Americans are becoming increasingly “aware of these slowly eroding walls of privacy,”(Hirsh) and more than half polled admit concern “about the overall accumulation of personal information about them “by […] law enforcement, government, […] and other groups,” though “they accept it as an unavoidable modern phenomenon” (Hirsh). The question is, how far is too far to trust the government with the collection, proper storage, and usage of this information? Studies show that “Americans believe that business, government, social-media sites, and other groups are accessing their most personal information without their consent” (Hirsh). People should be given the ability to admit or deny access to their personal information. The government does not have a right to use whatever information it wants for any purpose it wishes. Michael Hayden, once the NSA director for seven years, says, “Even I recognize that it's one thing for Google to know too much, because they aren't putting me in jail. It's another thing for government, because they can coerce me” (Hirsh). The United States government's ability to collect information about its citizens and residents should be restricted by what kind of information it can take, how it can acquire it, and what it can use it for.
United States’ surveillance state, No Place to Hide is worth the time of readers who are
Taylor, James Stacey. "In Praise of Big Brother: Why We Should Learn to Stop Worrying and Love Government Surveillance." Public Affairs Quarterly July 2005: 227-246.
Edward Snowden is considered to be a whistle blower because he did an unethical doing and decided to make an ethical decision by making the American people aware of the wrongdoings of our government. Snowden raised his right hand and sworn to abide by the constitution and uphold the constitution. After working with these agencies Snowden saw that it was not right and unconstitutional, so he decided to copy the files and release it to the American people. In order for him to protect himself he had to flee to a different country before he could actually release the information.
They describe that when Snowden revealed the extent of the NSA and GCHQ, there was both an outcry and a sense of envy to the power and resources the NSA had at surveillance. This is where a major flaw comes into play with the pro-surveillance argument. They base their argument off the idea that governments must watch everyone, as anyone could be a horrible terrorist. The Power of Critical Thinking calls that method of thinking a “composition fallacy”, and it really hurts their argument (Vaughn 170). The idea is that one cannot create a logical argument by basing what is true of the parts must be true of the whole, in this case the idea that a small minority of bad people can be watched legally, therefore all people can be watched legally because of the actions of a few. That is not the only fallacy used in that argument as a hasty generalization in which “The drawing of a conclusion about a target group based on an inadequate sample size” (Vaughn 191). It would be like hating all Muslims for the actions of ISIS, or seeing all blacks as thugs because of a small minority. It is nothing short of stereotyping, but in this case seeing all people as horrible people online because a few people really are horrible people