It's interesting how O'Callaghan is specifically calling out people from more well-off neighborhoods. He's isolating them but for the reason that they won't understand the importance of these apps. It's to prove his point that Citizen/Nextdoor are important for people in higher crime neighborhoods.

In the article, authors Gans and Mann uses Logos with the case 2005 case of Jean Charles de Menezes and uses that real story to show how in the hands of the surveillant, video proof can tarnished. Surveillance can be a useful tool but, "the one-sided curation of the evidence undermines their integrity." The quote is able to capture the tone, it captures the danger the authors are trying to show.

Statt appeals to the audience's emotions using pathos, it is to strike surprise/shock to the audience by hearing that people's privacy have been breached and are at "risk" of being on tv without their consent. Statt uses this to show the audience issues that are coming from these contact trace apps. The quote, "The scattershot approach has raised concerns about the long-term effects this kind of software could have for human rights and privacy protections" best shows the overall tone. It shows a sense of worry concerning these new tracing apps