LSAT 104 | Section 3 | Reading Comprehension: Q5

RC Question 5 Explanation

DISCUSSION: I had to think about this one for a while. The author’s conclusion on lines 52-58 is very important.

Specifically, lines 55-58 are important. The author says that an impartial jury should be full of people who are informed, curious and opinionated.

If you read or watch a lot of media, you probably are one or more of those things.

Imagine a jury of people without TVs, who don’t read news and who never gossip about crimes. That doesn’t sound like an informed, opinionated or curious jury.

I’m not 100% satisfied with the right answer to this question. But the standard is very low. The question asks about a possibility that is suggested by the passage.

___________

1. The author never says that mass media coverage should change how trials themselves operate.
2. The author never says how jurors can minimize biases.
3. CORRECT. See lines 55-58. Impartiality comes from a process where citizens are informed (they don’t live in a cave, and they read the news), curious (they likely ask about what’s happening in their community) and opinionated (they may have formed opinions while watching mass media).
    
   We’re only looking for something “suggested” by the passage. These lines do suggest that mass media coverage could improve impartiality if it made jurors more informed, curious or opinionated.
4. The author thinks that its not very useful for judges to question jurors (voir dire). See the third paragraph.
5. The author never talks about personal bias. It’s very hard for anyone to recognize their own biases.