Topic: The regulation of surveillance technologies and internet rules
Thesis/Conclusion: While surveillance technologies pose concerns regarding effectiveness and legality, internet rules aim to safeguard consumers. Both areas require careful consideration to balance privacy, security, and individual rights.
Premises and Evidence/Sources:
1. Surveillance Technologies:
- Premise: Surveillance technologies raise questions about their effectiveness in enhancing public safety and their legality in terms of privacy and civil liberties.
- Evidence/Source: Mantel (2017) discusses the use of new surveillance technologies in policing and their implications for privacy and civil liberties. The article examines the effectiveness of these technologies in preventing crime and apprehending criminals, as well as the legal challenges they face.
2. Internet Rules:
- Premise: New internet rules aim to protect consumers from online threats such as data breaches, identity theft, and misinformation.
- Evidence/Source: Fischer (2024) explores the implementation of new internet rules designed to safeguard consumers’ online activities. The report discusses measures to regulate tech companies and ensure transparency, privacy, and fair competition in the digital space.
3. Balancing Privacy and Security:
- Premise: Both surveillance technologies and internet rules require a delicate balance between privacy concerns and security needs.
- Evidence/Source: Various scholarly articles and reports provide insights into the ongoing debate about balancing privacy and security in the context of surveillance technologies and internet regulations. While some argue for stronger privacy protections to prevent government overreach and abuse of power, others advocate for enhanced security measures to combat cyber threats and ensure public safety.
Working Thesis Statement/Conclusion: the regulation of surveillance technologies and internet rules presents complex challenges that necessitate a balance between privacy, security, and individual rights. While surveillance technologies raise concerns about effectiveness and legality, new internet rules aim to safeguard consumers from online threats. Both areas require careful consideration and ongoing scrutiny to ensure the protection of privacy and civil liberties while maintaining public safety and security.
fisher , karen. “CQ Researcher.” Sage CQ Library, Karen Fischer, 22 Mar. 2024,
cqpress.sagepub.com/
mantel, Barbara. “CQ Press – CQ Researcher.” Sage Pub, 21 Apr. 2017, cqpress.sagepub.com/.
One thought on “Peer review – felipe”
1.Does the draft include a thesis statement/ conclusion? What is it? Is it clearly stated and arguable?
Yes, the thesis statement is “internet rules aim to safeguard consumers.” This is unequivocal.
2.Does every body paragraph begin with a premise/ topic sentence that supports the thesis?
Yes, all three premises clearly relate to the safeguards that internet rules aim to impose.
3.Does each body paragraph include relevant supporting evidence? Explain.
Yes, the first two premises have supporting evidence with a source, and the las premise has supporting evidence but does not yet have a source.
4.Does the draft include 3 sources, at least two of which are from CQ Researcher or Opposing Viewpoints/ BMCC database?
The draft includes two sources, the last premise seems to have a source on the way. But yes, both sources are from CQ Researcher.
5.Does the research support the author’s thesis without replacing their voice? For example, if there is a quote, is it explained and analyzed?
Yes, the working thesis statement/conclusion section seems to be a good section for analysis, but the prior supporting evidence sections don’t seem to include much analysis.
6.Does the author include at least 1 opposing viewpoint, followed by a refutation? Explain.
I don’t see an opposing viewpoint/refutation.
7.Is it clear who the audience is/ who the draft is addressed to?
Yes, it is directed at internet consumers, which is everyone of us really.
8. Does the author include an outline? If so, is it well-organized?
Yes, it is an outline with headings, and it is organized.
9. What are the strengths of this draft?
Clearly stated thesis, two supporting sources from CQ researcher, and bold-faced headings outlining the topic that will be discussed.
10. Do you have any other comments or suggestions?
I think the supporting evidence sections just require further expansion and analysis and this shaping up to be a very persuasive essay.