Reading ComprehensionDifficulty: Easy

PT102 S1 P1 Q2 Explanation

Office Email Privacy

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Reading Comprehension question.

TopicsLocate DetailLaw

Keep going in LSAT Lab

  • Save & drill this skill build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Full official LSAT questions are available through LawHub. This page provides LSAT Lab's explanation, strategy, and review tools without republishing the full official question.

Passage

Most office workers assume that the messages they send to each other via electronic mail are as private as a telephone call or a face-to-face meeting. That assumption is wrong. Although it is illegal in many areas for an employer to eavesdrop on private conversations or telephone calls—even if they take place has emerged as one of the more complicated legal issues of the electronic age.

People’s opinions about the degree of privacy that electronic mail should have vary depending on whose electronic mail system is being used and who is reading the messages. Does a government office, for example, have the right to destroy electronic messages created in the course of running the government, thereby denying public should thus have the right to review any documents created during the conducting of government business.

Questions about electronic mail privacy have also arisen in the private sector. Recently, two employees of an automotive company were discovered to have been communicating disparaging information about their supervisor via electronic mail. The supervisor, who had been monitoring the communication, threatened to fire the employees. When the employees filed a grievance owned the computer system, its supervisors had the right to read anything created on it.

In some areas, laws prohibit outside interception of electronic mail by a third party without proper authorization such as a search warrant. However, these laws do not cover “inside” interception such as occurred at the automotive company. In the past, courts have ruled that interoffice communications may be considered private only if unfortunately, such complex codes are likely to undermine the principal virtue of electronic mail: its convenience.

What this question is testing

Locate Detail

Your task

Pin down exactly what the question asks about the passage — a detail, the author's view, the structure, or the main point — before looking at the choices.

Common trap

Answers that restate a true detail from the passage but don't answer the specific question being asked.

Winning move

Anticipate the answer in your own words from the passage, then find the choice that matches that prediction.

Reading along? Open the full official question in LawHub — we show a fragment here and keep the reasoning in our own words.

The question
2.

According to the passage, which one of the following best expresses the reason some people use to oppose the deletion of electronic mail

Answer choices

  1. Too Strong: obsession with secrecy1% picked this

    Such deletion reveals the extent of government’s unhealthy obsession

    This doesn't match either of the available answers we get from our Support Window. "Don't delete emails in a government office, because ..." - the paper version doesn't have all the correspondence details that the email version has - government officials are civil servants whose work the public has a right to review Not only does this not match the available answers, it also just says something stronger (obsessed with secrecy) than we ever hear from the passage.

  2. Correct87% picked this

    Such deletion runs counter to the notion of government’s accountability to

    Why this is right

    This matches the 2nd of the available answers we get from our Support Window. "Don't delete emails in a government office, because ..." - the paper version doesn't have all the correspondence details that the email version has - government officials are civil servants whose work the public has a right to review The final sentence of the 2nd paragraph is saying that government officials serve (are accountable to) their constituents, and that constituents have a right to review docs created by the government.

    Skill tested: Locate Detail · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

  3. Too Strong6% picked this

    Such deletion clearly violates the legal requirement that government offices keep duplicate copies of

    Too Strong: all Out of Scope: duplicates This doesn't match either of the available answers we get from our Support Window. "Don't delete emails in a government office, because ..." 1. the paper version doesn't have all the correspondence details that the email version has. 2. government officials are civil servants whose work the public has a right to review. This brings up a requirement to keep duplicate copies of all transactions, an extreme idea we never heard about.

  4. Out of Scope: guidelines against6% picked this

    Such deletion violates the government’s own guidelines against destruction of

    This doesn't match either of the available answers we get from our Support Window. "Don't delete emails in a government office, because ..." 1. the paper version doesn't have all the correspondence details that the email version has. 2. government officials are civil servants whose work the public has a right to review. This talks about a guideline from the government that bans destruction of electronic records. We never heard about any such guideline in the passage.

  5. Out of Scope: harms relations1% picked this

    Such deletion harms relations between government employees and

    This doesn't match either of the available answers we get from our Support Window. "Don't delete emails in a government office, because ..." 1. the paper version doesn't have all the correspondence details that the email version has. 2. government officials are civil servants whose work the public has a right to review. This brings up a never-discussed concept of harming relations between government employees and their supervisors.

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free