1. Was the information presented in this selection new to you? Why or why not? How would you expect privacy advocates to respond to this selection? And what about those who argue that, in the name of national defense, the U.S. government needs to collect such data? How do you anticipate that Daniel J. Solove, author of the previous selection, “The Nothing-to-Hide Argument,” would respond? Why?

2. How would you characterize this selection: is it an argument of fact, of definition, or of evaluation; a causal argument; or a proposal argument? (The discussion of kinds of arguments in Chapter 1 will help you decide.) How would you characterize its function or purpose? (Chapter 6 on rhetorical analysis may help you here.)

3. Greenfield, like many people who write professionally for various Internet sites, uses a complex mix of styles: some parts of the article are quite informal while other parts could be part of an academic research paper. Choose several instances of particularly informal writing that would not be appropriate in an academic research paper, and explain why. How does Greenfield use comments about “grandma” to help structure the selection’s argument? (Chapter 13 discusses style in argument.)

4. Visual arguments play an important role in this selection. Evaluate the role that each of the visual arguments plays by discussing how the selection would have been different without it. (Chapter 14 on visual rhetoric will help you respond to this question.)

5. When Edward Snowden released confidential data from the NSA in 2013, he was immediately labeled a traitor by some and a hero by others. Collect and examine examples of discussions of Snowden — the comments posted in the Wire about this selection would be an easy place to begin — and write an evaluative argument in which you describe and evaluate the criteria used in making such an assessment by one side or the other. (In other words, your task is not to evaluate Snowden or his actions but to examine and evaluate the criteria his supporters or detractors used in reaching that conclusion.) An interesting challenge would be first to assess your own response to Snowden’s actions and second to evaluate the criteria used by those who share your opinion of his actions to come to such a conclusion. Doing so will require you to examine the tradeoffs you’re willing to make in balancing competing interests when the debate is about privacy. (Chapter 10 on evaluative arguments will help you consider and evaluate the criteria used in these discussions.)