Cons Of Hacking In Elections

765 Words2 Pages

Writers have the ability to influence the world, to change people’s views, and to inform those reading of events. As writers of CNN, Wesley Bruer and Evan Perez have the job of informing the public of current events that affect our lives. They also have the ability to influence the way their readers perceive that situation. Upon writing the article “Officials: Hackers breach election system in Illinois, Arizona”, these two authors ignored the fact that these hackers may have had the intention of affecting the elections. As said in the title, the election system was hacked in Illinois and Arizona. The phrase “hackers have breached election databases”, or variations of this are easily found a minimum of four times. With the constant reminder …show more content…

Politics being such a controversial topic and a constant heated argument, the electoral system being hacked would cause panic throughout the states. Each person is so quick to blame another for a problem and it puts them at ease knowing another is at fault and not themselves. Blame placing in this case is put on an overseas hacker, implying no politician was involved. “Investigators believe the hackers are likely based overseas, according to a law enforcement official.” However, it is still possible for politicians to be part of the hacking. Often times, rumors are whispered that men and women of power will hire a separate person to do illegal actions for them to avoid punishment or disapproval coming directly to them. It is instead mistakenly placed on another man who is covering in exchange for a lump sum of money. The second question to ask is how to solve the problem. The government is quick to place the blame on the states. Stating “DHS has offered to help states increase security of their systems, but states have rebuffed federal help,” makes the general public assume the states are at fault for this, not the government …show more content…

In this particular article, vague wording was present throughout. Starting with the statistic at the beginning, saying “...comprising up to 200,000 personal voter records…”. Given that it is almost impossible to know the exact amount of information the hackers accessed, it is understandable that this is broadly stated. However it does cause uneasiness among citizens in those states as they many have been one of those “up to 200,000 people”. Many of what the two journalists reported were assumptions, although they were well researched and thought through, they were still assumptions. By saying things like “likely based overseas”, and “likely include information” is reason enough to cause doubt. Because of the vague wording in these phrases, there is doubt in the article and readers should take a moment and remember what they are reading can not be completely true, however it has truth to

Open Document