Essay Author and Title:
“If You Run a Red Light, Will Everyone Know?” by Brad Stone


Central Argument of the Essay:
(p. 348) That people’s personal criminal records (or lack thereof) are too easily accessed on the web.



My Central Claim about the nature/effectiveness of the argument in the essay:
I found the argument to be quite effective. I found the way that Stone ended the essay to have great effect by saying how CriminalSearches.com creators feel that the site is like a seatbelt, and then throwing in the fact that both of them had clean records.



This is how the author manipulated the rhetorical appeals:

* The logos appeal:
A very logical appeal because many people were probably unaware of the site and how anybody can access it and see any sort of criminal record that they might have

* The ethos appeal:
Stone appealed to his audience because he seemed to be like the average person who seemed pessimistic about the website and the potential harm that could come with the site, despite the good it is trying to do.

* The pathos appeal:
Appealed to the audiences emotions because I would like to think that nobody would want their name out on this site if they had done something in their past that might warrant their name to appear on it.



My conclusion about the nature/effectiveness of the argument in the essay:
I found the article to be quite appealing because of the nature of the topic. I wouldn’t want my personal record being on the internet for the whole world to see, and that’s how Stone chose to approach the issue in his writing. He seemed like the average person who didn’t want his record out on the internet either, instead of looking down on anyone who might have been on the site like some writers might have chosen to style their writing. Stone’s concerns were much like his audience’s, which made the effect on the readers much more profound.