单选题 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, Linkedln, 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 scrutinising 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.
单选题 What does the author mainly discuss in the passage?
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】题干询问的是这篇文章的主旨。根据文章内容，作者在第二段最后一句提出了“在调查潜在候选人的背景时是否应该使用社交媒体进行筛选”的问题，故可定位至此。作者在首段引入社交媒体的话题，在第二段最后一句提出本文主题：在调查求职者背景时是否应该使用社交媒体进行筛选?下文围绕该问题展开，分析了使用社交媒体筛选求职者的利与弊，并在末段给出了具体的建议，故本题选D。选项A只涉及了文章内容的一方面，过于片面，故排除。选项B过于夸大，且与文章探讨的主题无关，故排除。这篇文章客观分析了用社交媒体筛选求职者的利与弊，而不是分析社交媒体本身的利与弊，故排除选项C。
单选题 What might happen when social media is used to screen job candidates?
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】根据题干信息词social media is used to screen job candidates，答案线索可定位至第三段。第三段首句表示用社交媒体筛选求职者这种做法很常见，并用数据佐证。随后在本段最后两句指出此举存在道德和法律风险，如果操作不当，会被认为是不道德甚至非法的。A项是原文unethical or even illegal的同义替换，故是正确答案。原文说使用社交媒体对求职者进行筛选可以避免雇用“有毒”的员工，从而有助于防止公司声誉受到影响，故排除选项B。选项C的内容在文中没有提到，属于无中生有，故排除。文中只提及社交媒体筛选可能会影响录用决定，并未提及会使其复杂化，故排除选项D。
单选题 When could online personal information be detrimental to candidates?
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】根据题干信息词detrimental to candidates，答案线索可定位至第四段。第四段第三句提到：“私人页面上的图片或评论如果被断章取义，可能会毁掉一个完美候选人被录用的机会。”社交媒体筛选会对求职者产生不利影响，而产生不利结果的条件就是该句所说的“私人页面上的图片或评论被断章取义”。A项中的is separated from context是原文are taken out of context的同义替换，故是正确答案。B、D两项的内容本身是中立性行为，不会直接对求职者产生不利的影响，故排除。C项文中未提及，故排除。
单选题 How can employers use social media information to their advantage while avoiding unnecessary risks?
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】根据题干信息词employers、to their advantage和avoiding unnecessary risks，答案线索可定位至第五段。第五段讲述用社交媒体筛选求职者对公司的好处，即有助于确保不会雇用一个既使公司损失金钱又玷污公司声誉的“有毒”员工，“既使公司损失金钱又玷污公司声誉”即题干中所说的“风险”，而规避这一风险的方式就是上文中所说的“有些事情可以给予合法考虑——使社交媒体成为相关信息的宝贵来源”，各选项中legitimate同义替换，故B项正确。A项虽然复述了原文信息delicate balance，但表述过于笼统，故排除。文中提到将公司录用决定而不是个人信息记录在案，故排除C项。D项文中未提及，故排除。
单选题 What does the author suggest doing before screening job candidates on social media?
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】根据题干中的信息词before screening job candidates，答案线索可定位至第六段。第六段最后一句表示，但在使用社交媒体筛选求职者之前，为了遵守所有法律，必须事先咨询管理人员和法律团队，C项是原文consulting with management and legal teams的同义替换，故为正确答案。A项误读了末段部分信息，原文说要以专业方式进行，请人力资源进行把控，而不是让专业人员把控整个流程，故排除。B项文中未提及，故排除。文中提及公司制定规则，针对的是社交媒体筛选，而不是针对向求职者的提问，故排除D项。