Self-study
P1
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. ████ ██████████ ██ ██████ ████████ ██ ██ ███████ ██ ████ █████ ███ ██ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███████ █████████████ ██ █████████ ████████████ ██ ████ ████ █████ ██ █ █████████████ █████████████████ ███ ██ █████ █████ █████████ ██████████ █████ ██ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████████ ████ █████████████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ██ ███ ████ ███████████ █████ ██████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████
Intro to Issue ·
No clear rules on email privacy
Office workers wrongly assume that their emails are private.
P2
████████ ████████ █████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ████ ████ █████████ ██ █████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██ █████ ████ ███ ███ ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ████ █ ██████████ ███████ ███ ████████ ████ ███ █████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ████████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ███ ███████████ ███████ ███████ ██████ ██████ ██ ████ ██████████ ███
Public Sector (Government) ·
Are government emails private?
If yes, then they can destroy them and deny public access.
Proposition ·
Yes, because there are paper versions that the public can access
Opposition ·
No, because the paper versions are incomplete; emails contain more information
P3
█████████ █████ ██████████ ████ ███████ ████ ████ ██████ ██ ███ ███████ ███████ ███
Private Sector (Business) ·
Are private sector employees's emails private?
Example ·
Not private
Two employees talk shit over email about their boss. Boss finds out. Fires them. Judge rules in favor of company because the computers were company property hence boss had right to read anything on it.
P4
██ ████ ██████ ████ ████████ ███████ ████████████ ██ ██████████ ████ ██ █ █████ █████ ███████ ██████ █████████████ ████ ██ █ ██████ ████████ ████████ █████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ████████ ████████████ ████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ████████ ███
Law ·
No privacy for "inside" interception
Law sometimes protects against third party eavesdropping but not when the third party is an "insider." So the police (outsider) can't eavesdrop on you but your boss (insider) can.
Exception ·
Reasonable expectation of privacy
If you have a reasonable expectation of privacy, then privacy could trump. But there is no absolute guarantee.
Solution ·
Encrypt messages
If you're an employee and want privacy, you may just have to encrypt your emails. But that's a huge pain in the butt.
Passage Style
Critique or debate
Problem-analysis
7.
The author's primary purpose in ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ██
a
demonstrate that the ██████████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ ██████████
“Advances in computer technology” is too broad; the author discusses only electronic mail. In addition, the author isn’t trying to show that the right to privacy has been eroded or threatened. Rather, she simply draws attention to certain questions about privacy that are raised by electronic mail.
b
compare the legal ██████ ██ ██████████ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ███ ███████ ███████
Although the author does discuss email in the government and private sectors in P2 and P3, the overall purpose of the passage isn’t to compare how email is handled in these sectors. Both sectors are brought up to present examples of questions that are raised regarding privacy of email.
c
draw an extended ███████ ███████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ██ █████████ █████████████ ██ ████████████ ████████
The author mentions telephones and in-person communications at the beginning of the passage, but doesn’t draw out an “extended” analogy in the rest of the passage. She switches subjects to electronic mail and discusses electronic mail in the rest of the passage.
d
illustrate the complexities ██ ███ ███████ ██████ ███████████ ██████████ ████ ██ ███ █████████
This best captures the primary purpose, which is to tell us about
e
explain why the ██████ ████ ███ ████ ████ ██ ████ ████████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ ███ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████
The author doesn’t discuss any reasons that courts haven’t been able to make definitive rulings on the issue of privacy of electronic mail. The author does discuss how one court ruled in P3, and mentions how court have considered interoffice communications in the private sector, but doesn’t get into whether rulings are not definitive and why they’re not definitive.