Section C: Reading Comprehension
Directions: There are 2 passages in this section. Each passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements. For each of them there are four choices marked A), B), C) and D). You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre.
Passage One
Questions 46 to 50 are based on the following passage.
Social media is absolutely everywhere. Billions of people use social media on a daily basis to create, share, and exchange ideas, messages, and information. Both individuals and businesses post regularly to engage and interact with people from around the world. It is a powerful communication medium that simultaneously provides immediate, frequent, permanent, and wide-reaching information across the globe.
People post their lives on social media for the world to see. Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, and countless other social channels provide a quick and simple way to glimpse into a job candidate’s personal life—both the positive and negative sides of it. Social media screening is tempting to use as part of the hiring process, but should employers make use of it when researching a potential candidate’s background?
Incorporating the use of social media to screen job candidates is not an uncommon practice. A 2018 survey found that almost 70% of employers use social media to screen candidates before hiring them. But there are consequences and potential legal risks involved too. When done inappropriately, social media screening can be considered unethical or even illegal.
Social media screening is essentially scrutinizing a job candidate’s private life. It can reveal information about protected characteristics like age, race, nationality, disability, gender, religion, etc., and that could bias a hiring decision. Pictures or comments on a private page that are taken out of context could ruin a perfectly good candidate’s chances of getting hired. This process could potentially give an unfair advantage to one candidate over another. It creates an unequal playing field and potentially provides hiring managers with information that can impact their hiring decision in a negative way.
It’s hard to ignore social media as a screening tool. While there are things that you shouldn’t see, there are some things that can be lawfully considered—making it a valuable source of relevant information too. Using social media screening appropriately can help ensure that you don’t hire a toxic employee who will cost you money or stain your company’s reputation. Consider the lawful side of this process and you may be able to hire the best employee ever. There is a delicate balance.
Screening job candidates on social media must be done professionally and responsibly. Companies should stipulate that they will never ask for passwords, be consistent, document decisions, consider the source used and be aware that other laws may apply. In light of this it is probably best to look later in the process and ask human resources for help in navigating it. Social media is here to stay. But before using social media to screen job candidates, consulting with management and legal teams beforehand is essential in order to comply with all laws.
46. What does the author mainly discuss in the passage?
47. What might happen when social media is used to screen job candidates?
48. When could online personal information be detrimental to candidates?
49. How can employers use social media information to their advantage while avoiding unnecessary risks?
50. What does the author suggest doing before screening job candidates on social media?
Passage Two
Questions 51 to 55 are based on the following passage.
In recent years, the food industry has increased its use of labels. Whether the labels say ‘non-GMO’ (非转基因的) or ‘no sugar,’ or ‘zero carbohydrates’, consumers are increasingly demanding more information about what’s in their food. One report found that 39 percent of consumers would switch from the brands they currently buy to others that provide clearer, more accurate product information. Food manufacturers are responding to the report with new labels to meet that demand, and they’re doing so with an eye towards giving their products an advantage over the competition, and bolstering profits.
This strategy makes intuitive sense. If consumers say they want transparency, tell them exactly what is in your product. That is simply supplying a certain demand. But the marketing strategy in response to this consumer demand has gone beyond articulating what is in a product, to labeling what is NOT in the food. These labels are known as “absence claims” labels, and they represent an emerging labeling trend that is detrimental both to the consumers who purchase the products and the industry that supplies them.
For example, Hunt’s put a “non-GM” label on its canned crushed tomatoes a few years ago—despite the fact that at the time there was no such thing as a GMO tomato on the market. Some dairy companies are using the “non-GM” label on their milk, despite the fact that all milk is naturally GMO-free, another label that creates unnecessary fear around food.
While creating labels that play on consumer fears and misconceptions about their food may give a company a temporary marketing advantage over competing products on the grocery aisle, in the long term this strategy will have just the opposite effect: by injecting fear into the discourse about our food, we run the risk of eroding consumer trust in not just a single product, but the entire food business.
Eventually, it becomes a question in consumers’ minds: Were these foods ever safe? By purchasing and consuming these types of products, have I already done some kind of harm to my family or the planet?
For food manufacturers, it will mean damaged consumer trust and lower sales for everyone. And this isn’t just supposition. A recent study found that absence claims labels can create a stigma around foods even when there is no scientific evidence that they cause harm.
It’s clear that food manufacturers must tread carefully when it comes to using absence claims. In addition to the likely negative long-term impact on sales, this verbal trick sends a message that innovations in farming and food processing are unwelcome, eventually leading to less efficiency, fewer choices for consumers, and ultimately, more costly food products. If we allow this kind of labeling to continue, we will all lose.
51. What trend has been observed in a report?
52. What does the author say is manufacturers’ new marketing strategy?
53. What point does the author make about non-GMO labels?
54. What does the author say absence claims labels will do to food manufacturers?
55. What does the author suggest food manufacturers do?
Answers & Explanations (答案与解析)
Passage One
46. D。解析：题干问“作者在文章中主要讨论了什么？”。第二段末尾提出核心问题：“should employers make use of it when researching a potential candidate’s background?”（雇主在调查潜在候选人的背景时是否应该利用它？）。随后的所有段落都在讨论社交媒体招聘筛选的好处和潜在的法律/道德风险，并最终给出建议。因此全文主要讨论的是“是否应该使用社交媒体来筛选求职者”，对应选项 D (Whether social media should be used to screen job candidates)。
47. A。解析：题干问“当社交媒体被用于筛选求职者时，可能会发生什么？”。第三段最后两句指出：“But there are consequences and potential legal risks involved too. When done inappropriately, social media screening can be considered unethical or even illegal.” (但也存在后果和潜在的法律风险。如果做得不恰当，社交媒体筛选可能会被认为是不道德的甚至是非法的。) unethical 对应 moral，illegal 对应 legal，对应选项 A (Moral or legal issues might arise 道德或法律问题可能会出现)。
48. A。解析：题干问“在线个人信息什么时候可能对候选人有害(detrimental)？”。第四段第三句指出：“Pictures or comments on a private page that are taken out of context could ruin a perfectly good candidate’s chances of getting hired.” (私人页面上脱离语境/断章取义的图片或评论可能会毁掉一个完美候选人被雇佣的机会)。taken out of context 对应选项 A 的 separated from context (脱离语境)。
49. B。解析：题干问“雇主如何能利用社交媒体信息为自己创造优势同时避免不必要的风险？”。第五段第四句指出：“Consider the lawful side of this process and you may be able to hire the best employee ever.” (考虑到这个过程的合法方面，你也许能雇佣到有史以来最好的员工)。lawful side 对应选项 B 的 legitimate way (合法的方式)。
50. C。解析：题干问“作者建议在社交媒体上筛选求职者之前做什么？”。最后一段最后一句指出：“But before using social media to screen job candidates, consulting with management and legal teams beforehand is essential...” (但在使用社交媒体筛选求职者之前，事先咨询管理层和法律团队是必不可少的)。consulting 对应 seeking advice，management and legal teams 对应 management and legal experts。因此选 C。
全文翻译
社交媒体无处不在。每天有数十亿人在社交媒体上创作、分享和交流想法、信息和资讯，无论是个人还是企业。人们定期在社交媒体上发布自己的生活，刷帖、与他人互动，这些来自世界各地的人可能他们不曾见过。它是一个强大的交流媒介，同时在全球范围内提供即时、频繁、永久且影响广泛的交流。
人们把自己的生活发布在社交媒体上供世人观看。脸书、推特、领英和其他无数渠道，为了解求职者的个人生活——无论好坏——提供了一种快速简单的方式。社交媒体筛选作为招聘流程的一部分颇具诱惑力，但雇主在调查潜在候选人的背景时，应该使用它吗？
将社交媒体筛选求职者纳入招聘流程，这并非罕见做法。CareerBuilder 2018年的一项调查发现，近70%的雇主在面试求职者之前会使用社交媒体筛选他们。但其中也存在后果和潜在的法律风险。如果做得不恰当，社交媒体筛选可能被认为是不道德的甚至是违法的。
社交媒体筛选实质上是对求职者私人生活的审查。它会揭示求职者受保护的个人特征，比如年龄、种族、国籍、残疾证明、性别、宗教等等，这可能会使招聘决策产生偏见。脱离语境的私人页面上的图片或评论，可能毁掉一个原本完美的好候选人的被录用机会。这可能会不公平地给另一位候选人带来优势，造成不平等的竞争环境。作为招聘经理，社交媒体筛选的影响是难以忽视的。
社交媒体作为一种筛选工具令人难以忽视。虽然有些事情你不应该看到，但合法获得的某些信息可能是与工作高度相关的宝贵信息来源。如果处理得当，它可以帮你确保不会雇佣一个会耗费公司资金、玷污公司声誉的"毒瘤"员工。考虑到这个过程的合法一面，你或许能雇佣到有史以来最棒的员工。这也许是关于微妙平衡的最佳观点。
筛选求职者的社交媒体必须做得专业、负责。公司应明确规定，他们绝不会向候选人索要密码，且过程的记录方式必须一致。在利用社交媒体筛选求职者之前，所有雇主都应意识到法律适用哪些内容，考虑到这一点，或许最好把社交媒体筛选交给人事部门。社交媒体会继续存在。如何在不触犯法律和道德风险的前提下驾驭这一局面，可能并不容易。但在使用社交媒体筛选求职者之前，事先咨询管理层和法律团队是必不可少的，这样才能确保遵守法律法规。
Passage Two
51. D。解析：题干问“在一份报告中观察到了什么趋势？”。第一段指出：“consumers are increasingly demanding more information about what’s in their food.” (消费者越来越要求提供更多关于食品中所含成分的信息。) 和 “One report found that 39 percent of consumers would switch from the brands... to others that provide clearer, more accurate product information.” (一份报告发现39%的消费者会转向提供更清晰、更准确产品信息的品牌)。这反映了消费者对清晰产品信息的渴望不断增加，对应选项 D (Consumers, increasing desire for clear product information)。
52. A。解析：题干问“作者说制造商新的营销策略是什么？”。第二段指出：“But the marketing strategy... has gone beyond articulating what is in a product, to labeling what is NOT in the food. These labels are known as ‘absence claims’ labels...” (但是，为了回应这种消费者需求，营销策略已经超越了说明产品中含有什么，而转变为在食品上标明不含什么。这些标签被称为“缺失声明”标签)。标明不含什么，对应选项 A (Stressing the absence of certain elements in their products 强调其产品中不存在某些元素)。
53. D。解析：题干问“关于 non-GMO 标签，作者提出了什么观点？”。第三段举例说亨特番茄罐头和某些牛奶公司贴上“non-GM”标签，但其实当时市场上根本没有转基因番茄，且所有牛奶天然就是非转基因的。这段最后一句总结道：“another label that creates unnecessary fear around food” (这又是一个在食品周围制造不必要恐惧的标签)。对应选项 D (They cause anxiety about food among consumers 它们引起消费者对食品的焦虑)。
54. C。解析：题干问“作者说‘缺失声明’标签会对食品制造商产生什么影响？”。第四段指出这种策略在长期来看会产生相反的效果：“eroding consumer trust in not just a single product, but the entire food business” (不仅侵蚀对单一产品的消费者信任，而且侵蚀对整个食品行业的信任)。第六段首句进一步明确：“For food manufacturers, it will mean damaged consumer trust and lower sales for everyone.” (对于食品制造商来说，这意味着受损的消费者信任和所有人销量下降)。对应选项 C (Erode consumer trust and reduce sales 侵蚀消费者信任并降低销售额)。
55. B。解析：题干问“作者建议食品制造商怎么做？”。最后一段首句给出明确建议：“It’s clear that food manufacturers must tread carefully when it comes to using absence claims.” (很明显，食品制造商在使用缺失声明时必须小心行事)。tread carefully (小心行事) 对应选项 B 的 Exercise caution about the use of absence claims (对使用缺失声明保持谨慎)。C和D选项与文章内容完全无关。
全文翻译
近年来，食品行业增加了标签的使用。无论标签上写的是"非转基因"还是"无糖"，或者"零碳水"，消费者越来越要求获得更多有关其食品成分的信息。一份报告发现，39%的消费者会从他们目前购买的品牌转向其他能提供更清晰、更准确产品信息的品牌。食品制造商正以新标签回应这一需求，以在满足消费者需求的同时——并着眼于使自己的产品在竞争中占据优势——提升利润。
这种策略直觉上是合理的。如果消费者说他们想要透明度，那就准确地告诉他们产品中含有什么。但它做的不仅仅是这样。为了回应这种消费者需求，营销策略已经超越了说明产品中含有什么，而转变为在食品上标明不含什么。这些标签被称为"缺失声明"标签，代表着一种新兴趋势，并不只是像几年前亨特在其罐装碎番茄上贴上"非转基因"标签那样的做法。亨特这种做法的例证，尽管当时市场上根本没有转基因番茄这种东西。同样，一些乳制品公司销售的牛奶，也标有"非转基因"。但所有牛奶天然就是非转基因的，这又是一个在食品周围制造不必要恐惧的标签。
虽然创建利用消费者对食品的恐惧和误解的标签，可能会给一个品牌在竞争激烈的杂货店货架上带来暂时的优势，但从长远来看，这种策略可能会产生相反的效果。它在食品领域注入了一种恐惧的话语。以这种方式进行影响的过程中，制造商冒着不仅是对单一产品、而且是对整个食品行业失去消费者信任的风险。
最终，这在消费者的脑海中变成了一个问题：这些食物到底是否安全？通过购买和消费某些类型的食品，我是不是已经对我或我的家人，或者对地球造成了某种伤害？
对于食品制造商来说，这将意味着受损的消费者信任和所有人销量下降。而这并非只是推测。一项研究发现，当一种产品带有"无某物"的标签时，消费者认为其他不带该标签的产品就不那么健康，即使并无科学证据表明该成分会造成危害。
很明显，食品制造商在使用缺失声明时必须小心行事。除了可能对消费者信任和销量产生长期负面影响之外，缺失声明还传达了一个信息，即农业和食品加工方面的创新是不受欢迎的，这反而导致更低效率和更少选择，最终让消费者付出更高代价。如果制造商允许这种策略继续下去，我们将失去做出更可持续选择的能力。
核心搭配与高分句型
【核心搭配与高频短语】
on a daily basis：每天地，日常地（use social media on a daily basis）
take out of context：脱离语境，断章取义（taken out of context could ruin a candidate’s chances）
an unequal playing field：不平等的竞争环境（creates an unequal playing field）
in light of：考虑到，鉴于（In light of this it is probably best to...）
with an eye towards：考虑到，着眼于（with an eye towards giving their products an advantage）
play on：利用（感情、弱点等）（play on consumer fears and misconceptions）
tread carefully：小心行事，谨慎处理（food manufacturers must tread carefully）
【亮点句型解析】
Whether 引导的让步状语从句：
"Whether the labels say ‘non-GMO’ or ‘no sugar,’... consumers are increasingly demanding more information..."
（无论标签上写着“非转基因”还是“无糖”……消费者都越来越要求提供更多信息……）`Whether... or...` 表示“无论...还是...”，用于列举多种可能性，引出下文不论哪种情况都适用的主句。
"Whether the labels say ‘non-GMO’ or ‘no sugar,’... consumers are increasingly demanding more information..."
（无论标签上写着“非转基因”还是“无糖”……消费者都越来越要求提供更多信息……）`Whether... or...` 表示“无论...还是...”，用于列举多种可能性，引出下文不论哪种情况都适用的主句。
When it comes to... 固定句型：
"...food manufacturers must tread carefully when it comes to using absence claims."
（……当涉及到使用缺失声明时，食品制造商必须小心行事。）`when it comes to` 意为“当提到/涉及到...时”，其中 `to` 为介词，后接名词或动名词，是极高频的地道表达。
"...food manufacturers must tread carefully when it comes to using absence claims."
（……当涉及到使用缺失声明时，食品制造商必须小心行事。）`when it comes to` 意为“当提到/涉及到...时”，其中 `to` 为介词，后接名词或动名词，是极高频的地道表达。