Passage Summary: Employers say they monitor workers to keep things running smoothly, but an activist says we should ignore them because they are only saying that to benefit themselves.

Conclusion: The justifications offered by employers for electronic monitoring should be rejected as invalid.

Reasoning: The employers' explanations for surveillance—such as maintaining honesty and efficiency—are self-serving.

Analysis: The activist is guilty of a classic ad hominem attack, specifically a 'circumstantial' one. They are dismissing the employers' arguments not because the arguments are factually incorrect, but because the employers have a personal interest in the outcome. Even if a reason is self-serving, it can still be a valid and true justification. In your analysis of the choices, look for a description of this logical error: attacking the source's motives rather than the substance of their claims. It's like saying a doctor's advice to exercise is wrong just because the doctor owns a gym.