A Virtual Collision: When your private and professional worlds clash

25/04/2010 KayeE 28 comments

A Virtual Collision: When your private and professional worlds clash

In years gone by it was easy to separate our personal and our professional identity as we navigated through life on a purely physical level. Private and work lives were tightly linked to spaces; we had a workspace and a separate personal/home space. Today, many have an online identity in Facebook which they believe exists solely on a personal level, where only friends can access status updates, photos and notes. However, when it comes to the Internet never assume that something is private. If it is sent on a computer through a network it can be copied, printed, forwarded, linked to or saved. The lines have blurred and it is easy for our personal and professional lives to cross over into each other in this new virtual world. There is a need to shift our thinking and manage our online identity with great caution, as stated by Ladner (2009), “the digital availability of social information has led many to think it is a crisis of privacy. It is not; it is a crisis of identity management”. Due to the blurring of these virtual public and private lines a collision can occur. Your Facebook presence can negatively affect your professional identity, hinder job prospects and result in suspension or dismissal from your place of work.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica (2010) states that the intended use of Facebook was for college students to connect and to interact socially. However, Facebook has evolved in ways that even Mark Zuckerberg did not anticipate, as it has spread into the everyday experience of millions of people worldwide. Fraser and Dutta (2008) explain that, “the advent of social networking sites has created virtual norms that no longer make a meaningful distinction between private and public”. The danger here is that many people still think that the virtual world is anonymous and private. Whilst it is true that some chat rooms or online gaming communities are anonymous, Facebook for the majority of users is made up of social contacts that are initiated in the real world and real personal details are used (Dwyer,Hiltz & Passerini, 2007). Facebook users are still learning the consequences and repercussions of this as parts of their personal lives are now available to many.

Closely linked to our Facebook experience is our identity and how we want other people to think of us. Some people believe they can separate their Facebook identity from their real identity however, Zhao, Grasmuck & Martin (2008) explain that, “Facebook identities are clearly real in the sense that they have real consequences for the lives of the individuals who constructed them”. In the offline world it is intuitive to separate our lives into different sections. For example there are work, family and social activities. In the online environment it is not so easy to separate our identity, they meld together. In terms of our online and offline identity it is no longer wise to think of them as separate worlds.

Some would say that we are able to fully control our online identity in Facebook and that there are privacy controls that can be applied. This is true, but very few people set these up to their advantage (Debatin, Loveyjoy, Horn & Hughes, 2009). Even if privacy controls are applied, no individual has power over what a friend sends to you, what comments they make or who they share your information with (Boon & Sinclair, 2009). Many Facebook users choose to ignore these options because they do not believe that anything bad will happen to them and that bad things only happen to other people (Debatin et al., 2009). It is as if we have all been caught off guard in the way that social networking on Facebook has overtaken our lives. There are no set rules or regulations on social networking to help us navigate our way through, so we naively interact without considering the consequences to our personal and professional lives.

Posting inappropriate comments about our employers on Facebook can lead to workplace difficulties. Natasha Baker, an employment law attorney in San Francisco, says that people need to be very careful about what they say about their employers online, “Employers have and can discipline or terminate employees caught posting confidential, proprietary information about the company or its employees online” (Baker, n.d.). Baker (n.d.) goes onto say that “online participants should exercise freedom of speech but recognize the risks before they post that photo or blog”. It is apparent that some users of Facebook are inexperienced when it comes to understanding how devastating posting a comment or a photo can be to their career. A surgical nurse from Stockholm was recently suspended for posting pictures of surgeries that she had taken on her mobile phone. Although it was impossible to identify any of the patients from the pictures, posting them on Facebook has raised a number of moral and legal issues for all hospital staff. When questioned by hospital management, the nurse was said to be “devastated” over the incident (“Nurse suspended for posting surgery photos on Facebook,” 2008). The nurse obviously did not think that there was anything wrong with posting these photos on Facebook. She is obviously passionate about her career and wanted to share that passion with her Facebook friends. She did not consider the implications to her career, believing that her online presence was separate to her professional life. The nurse displayed a huge error in judgement as Facebook was not the appropriate place to be sharing these photos; these photos belonged in her professional world only.

In Warwick, Queensland recently, there was a case of two teachers who posed for photos in the school’s uniform, dressing it up with fish net stockings and high heels and then posting on Facebook. Despite their best intentions, the photos soon found their way around the entire school. The teachers have been moved from the classroom to administrative duties while the case is decided by the Queensland Education Ethical Standards Unit (Garvey, 2010). This is another example of people not thinking of the implications of their online presence in their professional lives. In pre-Internet days we were able to keep our personal and professional lives separate but now we have to carefully consider the possible consequences before posting anything on Facebook.

For some professions, such as nursing or teaching, adherence to a professional code of ethics applies not only while at work but also outside of work. Recently the Nursing and Midwifery Council warned their nurses to be careful about what they post and upload to their Facebook pages. They warned that nurses could find that what they posted online is being accessed by a far larger audience than what they had initially anticipated. Chris Cox the legal services director goes on to say, “Using a networking site to exercise a grievance, or to talk about something that happened at work, risks breaching a patient’s confidentiality” (“Misuse of networking sites,” 2009). As our real lives are subject to the law, ethics and morals so too is our virtual life.

When our virtual and real worlds collide in a negative way there is a cost to be paid. As Fraser and Dutta (2008) say, “Reputations are destroyed. Careers are ruined. Financial situations collapse….Families can be torn apart. People sink into dark depressions. Employers for their part, attract unwanted negative publicity. Employee morale is undermined. Everybody is on edge. Big Brother is watching. Nobody wins”. It is a matter of thinking before you post. What if my boss saw this? What if my work colleagues get hold of this? What if my partner read this? If there is any doubt about possible consequences to your professional life, be cautious and do not post it.

It is becoming common for employers to check a potential employees Facebook page before considering them for a job. In 2007 Britain’s Information Commissioner said that approximately 5 million young people in Britain, “had online profiles featuring content that could, if consulted by universities or potential employers, damage their higher education and career prospects” (Fraser & Dutta, 2008). Yet, they do not seem to care. They have become desensitised to the ubiquitous nature of the Internet and its effect on real life. Kluemper and Rosen (2009) in their testing of employment selection methods using social networking sites, found that their judges were able to “accurately distinguish high from low performers” simply by checking their Facebook profile. Examples of companies using this approach include a small consulting company in Chicago. The company was looking to employ an intern but before making their final decision, they checked his Facebook profile. Unfortunately for him, his profile listed his interests as smoking marijuana, shooting people and obsessive sex. Needless to say he was not offered the job (Finder, 2006). Something which was intended for his private world has spilled into his professional world, with disastrous results.

In another case Inspector Chris Dreyfus from England was applying for a promotion. His career had been going very well, with no obvious reason for him not to succeed. Unfortunately his employer checked his Facebook profile which showed him “flamboyantly advertising his gay lifestyle” and displaying “provocative photo postings and suggestive references” (Fraser & Dutta, 2008). He was turned down for this job not because he was gay but because of the suggestive photos and references on his Facebook page. Employers are obviously questioning the motives behind these postings and believe that there is a correlation with how employees will behave professionally.

Not only can posting inappropriate information on Facebook negatively affect your career, but simply logging on while at work can also have dire consequences for many employees. In England the government sees the use of Facebook during work time as a pure waste of time. They have as a consequence fired, disciplined, warned and demoted hundreds of staff members (Fraser & Dutta, 2008). A recent poll by IT security and control firm Sophos reports that one in seven Facebook users are online all of the time (“The lure of social networking,” 2008). Facebook is and can be a huge time waster, before you know it you have been online for hours with little to show for it. Employers are not able to wear the cost of the loss of productivity and time wasted because their staff are on Facebook. The financial cost of such an online presence whilst at work is enormous. In fact in England approximately £6.5 billion a year is lost according to a poll by Global Secure Systems and Infosecurity Europe (Social Networking Sites Costs UK, 2008). It is imperative that employees take the initiative in understanding their firm’s policy on the use of Facebook at work. A misunderstanding or misinterpretation of the organisational policy could result in punitive action or even worse, being fired.

There exists however, a strange juxtaposition when it comes to employers and their view of Facebook. For example, in America there are contradictions in two Government departments. The Pentagon has banned the use of Facebook by army professionals and yet the CIA is using Facebook as a way to find future spies (Fraser & Dutta, 2008). Some companies are embracing social networking and allow their employees to engage in it even during working hours. A California software company called Serena has commenced “Facebook Fridays” where employees are encouraged to log onto Facebook and connect with colleagues (Needle, 2007) in a bid to be relevant and to encourage professional networking at work. It is easy to ascertain that even the business world is confused about the place of social networks in professional life.

As with many online activities the law is slow to catch up with the ever evolving use of Social Network sites like Facebook in recruiting and evaluating candidates for jobs. The only legal guidelines are those already set in regards to discrimination. Miriam Wubmeister, a New York attorney, argues that until the boundaries are clearly laid out in relation to what is private and what is public knowledge that we will continue to see changes in legislation (Greenwald, 2008). It is as if we are playing catch-up with the legalities on online engagement rather than anticipating and being prepared for the future.

Not only do we now need to manage our career in the real world in relation to the decisions we make and what we do, we now have to manage and consider our online reputation. Make sure your personal privacy settings on Facebook are set to view your profile only to friends. Even then, don’t assume that it is safe. Think about what you are writing. Never comment, post or link to anything that you would not want your Mum (or your boss) to read! Your professional and personal reputation is priceless; you need to be diligent in protecting it. As stated by Daniel Solove (2007, p.31):

Our reputation can be a key dimension of our self, something that affects the very core of our identity. Beyond its internal influence on our self-conception, our reputation affects our ability to engage in basic activities in society. We depend on others to engage in transactions with us, to employ us, to befriend us, and to listen to us.

Your online reputation will last a lifetime and you can no longer afford to live in blissful ignorance or take the attitude of the popular Australian saying that ‘she’ll be right mate’. It is hoped after reading this paper that you will rethink your Facebook presence, that you will be aware that your online reputation can harm your professional career and as a consequence you will take greater personal responsibility for your interactions in your virtual world. If you do not, your Facebook presence could negatively affect your professional identity, hinder job prospects or result in suspension or dismissal from your place of work.

Reference List

Baker, N. J. (n.d.). How far is too far? Employers and the use of online searches. Retrieved April 2, 2010 from https://www.abanet.org/yld/tyl/febmar08/baker.html

Boon, S., & Sinclair, C. (2009). A world I don’t inhabit: disquiet and identity in Second Life and Facebook. Educational Media International. Vol. 46, pp. 99 – 110.

Debatin, B., Loveyjoy, J., Horn, A.-K., & Hughes, B. (2009). Facebook and Online Privacy: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Unintended Consequences. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 15(1), 83-108.

Dwyer, C., Hiltz, S., & Passerini, K. (2007, August 9). Trust and privacy concern within social networking sites: A comparison of Facebook and MySpace. Paper presented at the Thirteenth Americas Conference on Information Systems, Keystone, Colorado. Retrieved April 25, 2010, from http://csis.pace.edu/~dwyer/research/DwyerAMCIS2007.pdf

Facebook. (2010). In Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved April 20, 2010, from Encyclopædia Britannica Online: http://www.search.eb.com/eb/article-9438596

Finder, A. (June 11, 2006). For some, online persona undermines a Resume. The New York Times. Retrieved April 2, 2010 from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/us/11recruit.html

Fraser, M., & Dutta, S. (2008). Throwing sheep in the boardroom: how online social networking will transform your life, work and world. West Sussex, England: John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved April 2, 2010, from Books 24×7 database.

Garvey, C. (March 18, 2010). Teachers till in spotlight. The Chronicle. Retrieved April 2, 2010 from http://www.thechronicle.com.au/story/2010/03/18/teachers-still-in-spotlight/

Greenwald, J. (2008). Web-based screening may lead to bias suits. Business Insurance, 42(10), 1-6.

Kluemper, D. H., & Rosen, P. A. (2009). Future employment selection methods: evaluating social networking web sites. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(6), 567-580. Retrieved 1 April 2010, from Emerald Insight database.

Ladner, S. (2009). Don’t think privacy, think identity. Retrieved April 2, 2010 from http://copernicusconsulting.net/dont-think-privacy-think-identity/

Misuse of networking sites ‘could cost you your job’. (2009). Nursing Standard, 23(26), 8-8.

Needle, D. (2007). ‘Facebook Fridays’ enrich enterprise software firm. Retrieved April 4, 2010 from http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3710336

Nurse suspended for posting surgery photos on Facebook. (2008). The Lamp. Vol. 65, pp. 11Retrieved March 29, 2010 from Australia/New Zealand Reference Centre database.

Social Networking Sites Costs UK plc 6.5 Billion In Lost Productivity (2008). Retrieved 1 April 2010, from http://www.gss.co.uk/press/article/17/Social_Networking_Sites_Costs_UK_plc_%A36.5_Billion_In_Lost_Productivity/

Solove, D. J. (2007). The future of reputation: gossip, rumor, and privacy on the Internet. New Haven: Yale University Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com.au

The lure of social networking. (2008). MarketWatch: Global Round-up, 7(1), 234-235.

Zhao, S., Grasmuck, S., & Martin, J. (2008). Identity construction on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 1816-1836.

A Virtual Collision: When your private and professional worlds clash by Kaye England is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 Australia License.

Social Networks career, Facebook, identity, job, online, personal, private, professional, public, Social Networking, virtual world, work

Edit in Admin

Comments

Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Hi Sally,

Thanks for your comments! I agree that it should become part of the schools curriculum. I think that like many Web 2.0 applications we have been caught by surprise at some of the repercussions and consequences of using them. I am also a great advocate of Web 2.0, but just think that we need to approach it with a little common sense.

Cheers,
Kaye
Written by Sally Little about 2 years ago.

Hi Kaye, this is a good read about the use of Facebook, your views are the same as mine, we do need to be so careful with this media type. I wonder if topics of this nature are actually in the school curriculum. With increasing numbers of usage giving the next generation skills and preparation for safe cyberspace usage, so they can be Facebook savvy can only be a good thing!!
love Sally x
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Thanks Kym for your kind comments. I certainly think that it is something that we need to consider when commenting or adding media to SNSs.

Thanks,
Kaye
Written by Kym about 2 years ago.

Hi Kaye,

I loved your article, it was very thought provoking. It has certainly given me me something to think about on a subject that I hadn’t really given too much thought to previously.
Written by Nat about 2 years ago.

Yes that is right, thankyou for reading my paper first :0

I work in a records branch and the need for SNS is limited well non-existent really, however it was during my library prac for uni that I found the librarians and library clerks discussing about SNSs and how they had difficulty in gaining corporate support for time to practice before they could teach the ‘locals’ that got me wondering why isn’t already part of professional development? I do wish I had come across you paper eariler nonetheless is was a good read and definately something to seriously consider.
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Thanks Nat. I have read your paper too – in fact I think that it was the first one that I read! It was very interesting and very applicable to me as I work in an academic Library. I think that you are absolutely right when you say that ‘information professions should be using tools similar to facebook….for professional networking and being leaders in the field…” It sheds a new light on my professional experience as I have just realised that it is important for me to ‘lead by example’ by engaging in a professional and positive way with social networking. As danah boyd concludes in her paper Social Media is Here to Stay… Now What?, “Social media is here to stay. Now we just have to evolve with it”. I have always believed that to be so in my personal life …but I am more and more convinced that this is also as pertinent for me in my professional life.

boyd, danah. 2009. “Social Media is Here to Stay… Now What?” Microsoft Research Tech Fest, Redmond, Washington, February 26.
Written by Nat about 2 years ago.

KayeE
Your paper was a pleasure to read. To add to the examples you used about Facebook ruining careers, I am aware of an individual posting photos on facebook that now mean that individual can not do any covert duties thus limiting their career progression (obviously I can not give more details, but I think readers will understand the point in light of your paper).

You also commented that “there are no set rules…to help us navigate” in my paper The use of web 2.0 for professional development (stream2) I am asserting that information professions should be using tools similar to facebook (but not necessarily facebook or other popular sites) for professional networking and being leaders in the field so they can provide guidance. Similarly in sharlenescobie’s paper Libraries and the need to get onboard with Social Networking (stream 3) highlights the need for librarians to use SNS’s to reach their target audience, the average reader.
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Thanks Tim. I think that you are right – for most people Facebook is great for social networking and connecting with people. However, as in all aspects of our lives self control and common sense needs to be shown by users in order to protect themselves and those interacting with them.
Written by Tim Wheeler about 2 years ago.

Hi Kaye,
Very well written article. Concise and to the point.
I wholeheartedly agree with your comments on this issue. We live in a time period where so many people are led to believe that they are free to control their own destiny in what ever way they like.
Wake up call time… thats not how the world works. Self control and such things as self esteem go hand in hand.
Face book is most likely for many a wonderful fun pass-time, but in the wrong hands has become dangerous to themselves and others.
Well done Kaye.
See you soon.
Regards,
Tim W.
Written by jhiroberts about 2 years ago.

Hi Kaye,

Thanks for the article,

A great read.
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Hi Jhi,

You make a very important point that “more should be done by the greater community and social networking sites to highlight the potential dangers of such sites”. I think that a large proportion of people have trouble in determining what is ‘public’ and what is ‘private’. boyd (2007) in her article talks a lot about the differences in public and private and tries to answer some of the questions about what teenagers in particular think public and private is. It is an excellent article and I would recommend that you read it. I particularly like her definition of public as being “places that are accessible to anyone”. Therein lays the problem to most people on SNSs because we believe that our posts are not available to everyone – only to those that we have ‘allowed’ to be our ‘friends’. However, as per many of the examples in the paper – we know that this is not true. After reading a lot of the other conference papers and my own research I have become quite proactive in cautioning family and friends on the potential dangers of posting on SNSs (as well as being a big fan of SNSs).

Thanks,
Kaye

boyd, D. (2007). Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
Available: http://www.danah.org/papers/WhyYouthHeart.pdf
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Thanks Peter. I agree with you – I can’t imagine how people can post some of the totally inappropriate content on SNSs that we are currently seeing (as per some of the examples in my paper). It is quite possible though, that we only hear about the bad cases. Your point about educating and informing people about this is very valid. I think that in particular we need to be educating our children and teenagers. As stated by boyd (2007), “As a society, we need to figure out how to educate teens to navigate social structures that are quite unfamiliar to us because they will be faced with these publics as adults, even if we try to limit their access now”. How we do that as a society is a bit overwhelming, but as the mother of teenagers I know that I have an opportunity and an obligation to make my children aware of the positives and the negatives of SNS and how it can effect them (hopefully they will listen to me!!).

boyd, D. (2007). Why Youth (Heart) Social Network Sites: The Role of Networked Publics in Teenage Social Life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Learning Youth, Identity, and Digital Media Volume. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.
Available: http://www.danah.org/papers/WhyYouthHeart.pdf
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Thanks very much Hans – I was able to access and read the InTheBlack article. It posts some very interesting statistics – in the US “45 per cent of employers use social networking sites to research job candidates……another 11 per cent plan to start using social networking sites for screening”. That is a very high statistic and one that should cause us to be cautious about our online posts.

When it comes to screening candidates for a job – who can blame employers for checking social networking sites. It is free, easy and can be done extremely quickly. Or should we take the same view as Maureen Crawford Hentz, manager of talent acquisition at Osram Sylvania who says, “I don’t think it’s related to their bona fide occupational qualifications” (cited by Finder, 2006). I expect we will continue to see both sides of this debate play out online and in the media in the next couple of years.

Boyd, C. (2010). Controlling brand me. In The Black, 80(04), 44-47.

Finder, A. (June 11, 2006). For some, online persona undermines a Resume. The New York Times. Retrieved April 2, 2010 from http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/11/us/11recruit.html
Written by jhiroberts about 2 years ago.

Hi Kaye,

Online privacy in the social networking space is a very interesting and much contested debate.

I for one believe that more should be done by the greater internet community and social networking sites to highlight the potential dangers of such sites.

All of your examples show a lack of understanding by social networking users. I think the biggest issue is that people see social networking as being in the private sphere, and they do not see past that, when in relativity its in a very public sphere.

A great read.

Very informative

Cheers

Jhi
Written by PeterP about 2 years ago.

Hi Kaye
Good paper. Some of your examples of people posting inappropriate content are quite amusing. I guess some people just don’t understand what a seemingly harmless post on Facebook can do. I would hope these people are in the minority but I guess I probably wouldn’t be surprised about how many people are so naive.

Your comments about people becoming ‘desensitised to the ubiquitous nature of the Internet’ is probably more prevalent than I imagined. Also I agree about your thoughts on limiting posts to anything ‘you would not want your mother to read’.

One thing I think we can do as educated and informed Facebook users is keep an eye out for friends who do cross the line with their comments. On a couple of occasions now I’ve quietly let friends know that their post may not be in their best interests and they have taken my advice and removed the post.
Written by Hans about 2 years ago.

KayeE,
The article is in the current issue. I have attached the following link from the the digital edition from cpaaustralia http://itb.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx . I am not sure whether you will be able to access it without membership, but give it a try.

I suspect that the younger generation are more open to sharing, as that is what they have grown up with. I for one would rather be very careful with what I share.
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Kaye thanks for the reply I live in Queensland myself so it was good of you to post that extract from 1991.

I cannot see how including online identity can be part of this. I am not sure but weight and other physical appearances are not covered, so as much as I personally would like such legislation many would jump up and down and go it’s all PC, but that does not mean that possibly might happen. Good Point.
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Hi Hans,

Thanks for your comment. Samantha’s paper sounds very interesting and relevant to my own paper – so I will definitely read it tonight. It is a good idea to Google your own name every now and then. I am fortunate (or unfortunate – depends how you look on it) to have the same name as a famous and very popular patchwork quilter!! So you have to plough through quite a few pages before you reach anything on me! The journal article you quoted from InTheBlack sounds very pertinent to my paper and I would love to read it. Unfortunately there must be an embargo on it – as I tried to access it through a number of databases but could not find it.

I do agree with what you say is in the article, that we need to watch what we post. I don’t think that we can wait until laws are changed or technology sites offer better controls – for me it is most certainly a case of ‘better to be safe, than sorry”.
Written by Hans about 2 years ago.

In the television series Hill Street Blues(1981), Sergeant Phil Esterhaus: said “Hey, let’s be careful out there.” (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0081873/quotes). This is especially true in this digital age.
In a comment I made on another paper (But my Post was Private! Why We Can’t Assume Privacy on Social Network Sites by Samantha Warren, I mentioned googling your own name. In my case there were several pages of entries. I was not ashamed of any of the items, but this went to show what existed in cyberspace. I should also mention that this was before facebook and before I started to blog for this degree.

In regards to Facebook, there has been much controversy of late about the use of privacy settings. The default settings are to allow everybody to see your information. Samantha mentioned this in her paper here. She also pointed out that 80% of users retained the default settings.. This is to my mind a sorry state of affairs.

In the current issue of In The Black (The monthly journal of CPA Australia) there is an article titled Controlling brand me. I would suggest that the title says it all. Boyd says ‘.. with the popularization of social media tools such as LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter, branding has reached the individual. Even if you don’t craft your own online presence, the chances are you’ll end up with one”(Boyd, 2010).

The article then goes on to point out that employers tap into social media when hiring. It also gives the near obligatory advice to watch what you post.

Boyd, C. (2010). Controlling brand me. In The Black, 80(04), 44-47.
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Hi Michael,

Thanks for your comments. I would agree with you that my article does present a rather alarming view! I truly don’t think that the area of online/offline identity has been fully played out in terms of the consequences to our professional lives. It will be interesting to see what happens in the next couple of years. I would hope as is stated in the article you quoted by boyd (2007) that “over time, foolish digital pasts will simply become part of the cultural fabric”.

We are protected in Queensland (where I live) by the Anti-Discrimination Act, 1991. This Act protects us from discrimination on the grounds of sex, parental status, race, religious belief, political belief, impairment, trade union activity, lawful sexual activity, pregnancy, breastfeeding needs, family responsibilities, gender identity, sexuality and age. Do you think we will need to go so far as to add online identity or activity to the attributes in order to protect ourselves?

boyd, d. (2007). “We Googled you: should Fred hire Mimi despite her online history?’: case commentary June 2007. Retrieved 5 May, 2010, from http://www.danah.org/papers/HBRJune2007.html

Anti-Discrimination Act 1991 (Queensland), retrieved 6 May, 2010 from http://www.legislation.qld.gov.au/legisltn/acts/1991/91ac085.pdf
Written by Michael N about 2 years ago.

Hello Kaye. Your paper added much to the debate about privacy issues especially regarding reputation. I found your writing a little alarmist but your arguement was strong and there is no doubt this is an important issue to manage. My disagreement over the issue is not with you but rather the employer or person who is going to hire you, be your partner or even your friend. To base 100% rejection on Facebook for any reason seems unresonable if they are going to base a decision soley on that factor. The media and debates about this, even those at Curtin, revolve around giving the employer power and anxiety over your future economic and perhaps social status. What this means is, we debated in Net Communications this issue and some felt it was the right of the employer to look at everything public and make a decision. I feel it might be a ‘right’ it cannot be stopped but I question basing a decision strictly on net footprints and presence as short sighted.

In boyd’s (2007) article comments, and Coutu (2007) I could see the point that being seen to be protesting against the very country you are going to work in by the employer is an issue. But people change and assuming you cannot be part of the culture of a place because of your values and beliefs and contribute to reputation and profit is to me not ethical. It is wise to check anyone and part of that is using the internet. But at the same time there needs to be balance and I feel that issue has been weighted in favour of the employer. You could post something innocent and they might be offended, so does that mean we stop posting?

But as your argue reputation is important so well argued paper.

boyd, d. (2007). “We Googled you: should Fred hire Mimi despite her online history?’: case commentary June 2007. Retrieved 5 May, 2010, from http://www.danah.org/papers/HBRJune2007.html

Coutu, D. (2007). We Googled you. Harvard Business Review Retrieved 5 May, 2010, from http://hbr.harvardbusiness.org/2007/06/we-googled-you/ar/1
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Thanks Sky – very interesting comment! So in effect it is a deliberate action – like the tattoo example. I wonder if this is just another way for young people today to explore and expand their boundaries? In the offline world they dress a certain way, have piercings, tattoos etc. – and in the online world – they push the boundaries by what they post.

James et al., (2008) say that young people are not able to understand the consequences of their actions – that their moral and cognitive development is not fully matured. Their paper, Young People, Ethics, and the New Digital Media: A Synthesis from the Good Play Project, gives an excellent insight into the way that young people think and engage with social media. They say that young people are often “genuinely confused” about new technologies and don’t really know how to behave. If that is true, should we as a society label them or discredit their potential because of an error of judgment when they were teenagers? At the moment it would appear that we most certainly do (as per examples in my paper). So until the tide turns and there is a shift in thinking on SNS and professional behaviour – we need to educate our young people to protect their online identity. As the mother of two young people, I am proactive in educating them about their online identity and how to protect it.

James, C., Davis, K., Flores, A., Francis, J., Pettingill, L., Rundle, M. & Gardner, H. (2008). Young people, ethics, and the new digital media: a synthesis from the Good Play Project . Retrieved May 2, 2010 from http://www.pz.harvard.edu/eBookstore/PDFs/Goodwork54.pdf
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Thanks again – excellent comments which are broadening my thinking!

The Danah Boyd blog was especially interesting as I got an insight into her thoughts and research on teenagers and the use of SNSs – especially in relation to race and class. I don’t really see that here in Australia – although maybe I have blinders on and am a victim of my own particular race and class. What I especially drew on was her comment that “teens are using social network sites to building community and connect with their peers” (Boyd, 2007). I am the mother of a 22 year old and a 17 year old – both have participated in SNSs for at least the last 5 years. It is really interesting watching these connections and community play out in their lives. My 22 year old has been out of school for over 4 years – but still has connections with a large proportion of his school friends. In fact his closest friends are still those he went to school with. A number of them now don’t live locally – one is in Scotland and the other is in China – but the friendships are still strong. My 17 year old finished school last year – and despite moving into a full time job – still keeps up her relationships with her school friends – mainly through FaceBook. Experiences are shared through comments, photos, videos and links and they really do still have a strong connection. In fact they have commenced a closed FaceBook community of Grade 13s – and organise social events often. My own experience (of some 30 years ago!) is that after 12 months of leaving school I had no connection with my school friends – I had moved onto a new social network of friends. I am now wondering if maybe a part of their continued relationship with school friends is due to their participation in SNSs? I will watch in anticipation as research, I believe, will support that idea.

Data clean up is the other issue that is going to be big business in the future. At the moment, it is as you say, it is difficult to remove or clean up data from the past that may hurt you now or in the future. I suspect that they answer is out there somewhere – it just hasn’t been discovered or invented yet. Probably need to wait for a wave of cause and effect to set in – someone will find a solution for it out of a dire personal need – will then market it and make a fortune!

boyd, danah. 2007. “Viewing American class divisions through Facebook and MySpace .” Apophenia Blog Essay. June 24 . http://www.danah.org/papers/essays/ClassDivisions.html
Written by Sky about 2 years ago.

I like your point that it may become more socially acceptable to have a slightly muddy digital footprint, as it becomes more common.

I wonder, also, whether it may serve as a way for young people to future-proof themselves against ‘growing up’. If employers continue to do background searches online, putting information about radical political positions or socially marginalised behaviour online may prevent your future self from ‘selling out’ almost as effectively as facial tattoos…
Written by Britta Bohlinger about 2 years ago.

Many thanks for your comment. The Gettler’s article and his reference to the NY Times post are of course spot on, and precisely what we also witness here in the UK. Although, things sometimes also go the other way round: a coffeeshop manager recently fired her assistant via Facebook.

As you pointed out, it is increasingly online users who are not particularly tech-savvy but simply using SNSs for maintaining their relationships (or feel too powerless to reject a friend request) who find themselves under scrutiny when they change job or pursue promotion.

As I mentioned above, what I see at stake is the cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1984; boyd, 2007) that links people/online users to each other and generates social capital (ibid.). In essence this means that the higher educated, trained in critical thinking and negotiating content production, content sharing and content removal online users are the more likely they will be to see their data not leaking into undesirable arenas.

While a vast number of online users is already aware of the possibility that googling themselves could reveal data and comments related to them, the far more problematic issue is the management of removal of undesirable data. In some cases data may leak due to technical problems or lack of adjusted privacy settings. In many more cases, data may have been posted or shared by purpose by others. The key in such instances will be the individuals’ set of skills to spot this and negotiate the removal. Here, issues such as personal real-life relationships and status, power and available supporters (acting as micro pressure group on behalf of the individual whose reputation is at stake) will shape the outcome. Existing gaps of inequality may widen as long as those who did not grow up as ‘digital natives’, such as the ones who commented on Gettler’s post, have to learn the ropes in very painful ways.

I am curious how the delicate power balance between online users (and abusers) and the providers (SNSs, search engines) will evolve. What is at stake, is the jobs and social lives of those who were too late, unlucky, too poorly educated. What is currently still lacking is the availability of warning/ removal/ prevent devices within many SNSs which may be in the pipeline though.

Whose responsibility is it? Should we expect online users to resort to total image control (online and real life), harnessing extreme technologies of the self (Foucault, 1988) that result in hyper-anxious and mistrusting individuals (how far or close are we to that scenario anyway?)? Or, should employers be prevented from relying too much on non-approved online publications the way we critically evaluate academic papers before the gain access to a peer-reviewed journal?

References
Bourdieu, Pierre (1984) Distinction: a Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, trans. Richard Nice. Harvard University Press

boyd, danah. 2007. “Viewing American class divisions through Facebook and MySpace .” Apophenia Blog Essay. June 24 . http://www.danah.org/papers/essays/ClassDivisions.html

Foucault, Michel (1988) Technologies of the self. In L H Martin, H Gutman and P H Hutton (eds) Technologies of the self. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Written by Britta Bohlinger about 2 years ago.

Many thanks for your comment. The Gettler’s article and his reference to the NY Times post are of course spot on, and precisely what we also witness here in the UK. Although, things sometimes also go the other way round: a coffeeshop manager recently fired her assistant via Facebook.

As you pointed out, it is increasingly online users who are not particularly tech-savvy but simply using SNSs for maintaining their relationships (or feel too powerless to reject a friend request) who find themselves under scrutiny when they change job or pursue promotion.

As I mentioned above, what I see at stake is the cultural capital (Bourdieu, 1984; boyd, 2007) that links people/online users to each other and generates social capital (ibid.). In essence this means that the higher educated, trained in critical thinking and negotiating content production, content sharing and content removal online users are the more likely they will be to see their data not leaking into undesirable arenas.

While a vast number of online users is already aware of the possibility that googling themselves could reveal data and comments related to them, the far more problematic issue is the management of removal of undesirable data. In some cases data may leak due to technical problems or lack of adjusted privacy settings. In many more cases, data may have been posted or shared by purpose by others. The key in such instances will be the individuals’ set of skills to spot this and negotiate the removal. Here, issues such as personal real-life relationships and status, power and available supporters (acting as micro pressure group on behalf of the individual whose reputation is at stake) will shape the outcome. Existing gaps of inequality may widen as long as those who did not grow up as ‘digital natives’, such as the ones who commented on Gettler’s post, have to learn the ropes in very painful ways.

I am curious how the delicate power balance between online users (and abusers) and the providers (SNSs, search engines) will evolve. What is at stake, is the jobs and social lives of those who were too late, unlucky, too poorly educated. What is currently still lacking is the availability of warning/ removal/ prevent devices within many SNSs which may be in the pipeline though.

Whose responsibility is it? Should we expect online users to resort to total image control (online and real life), harnessing extreme technologies of the self (Foucault, 1988) that result in hyper-anxious and mistrusting individuals (how far or close are we to that scenario anyway?)? Or, should employers be prevented from relying too much on non-approved online publications the way we critically evaluate academic papers before the gain access to a peer-reviewed journal?

References
Bourdieu, Pierre (1984) Distinction: a Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste, trans. Richard Nice. Harvard University Press

boyd, danah. 2007. “Viewing American class divisions through Facebook and MySpace .” Apophenia Blog Essay. June 24 . http://www.danah.org/papers/essays/ClassDivisions.html

Foucault, Michel (1988) Technologies of the self. In L H Martin, H Gutman and P H Hutton (eds) Technologies of the self. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
Written by KayeE about 2 years ago.

Hi Britta,

Thanks for your comments. I agree with you that online reputation and identity management is going to be a big deal in the future. Already when you do a Google search on this topic there are thousands of companies and individuals offering you their service in helping you to portray the best possible online identity. This will be particularly important in years to come for those pursuing professional careers e.g. in politics or in the corporate world. However, as mentioned in my paper it is even now affecting the careers of teachers, nurses and policemen.

I have just read another interesting comment about online reputation management from The Sydney Morning Heralds Management Line, accessible at:

http://blogs.smh.com.au/executive-style/managementline/2010/04/01/buildinganonl.html

Leon Gettler suggests here that in the future people will need to take a proactive interest in what is posted about them online. Googling ourselves will become very common and if we are concerned about our online reputation then we will need to make sure that there is more good stuff rather than bad stuff being posted about us.

I am also wondering if one day we will become so accustomed to fun, strange or embarrassing things being posted about people on the Internet that we will begin to think of it as normal and acceptable behaviour. As you mention – maybe when the children of today grow up it will be the norm that there will be items posted about them (from when they were young) and that people will be more understanding about it…..only time will tell!
Written by Britta Bohlinger about 2 years ago.

Reputation and identity management seem to become ever more central to our very professional or personal being and yet, doing regular online housekeeping and strategically planning our online interactions are rather poorly developed skills. Many users still seem to think online activity is fun and as such it has no serious consequences. Logins and passwords seem to signify locked doors and miraculously hidden-away data, visible to those only who are approved friends – and more or less trustworthy giants such as Yahoo, Google etc.

Thinking about the data usage, contemplating data leaks and imagining the persistence of data exchanges beyond the individual’s ‘delete’ action are among the issues which cause a yawn or a headache to many. Too boring, too abstract and potentially anxiety-triggering, it seems to me, we are facing the results of fact-based educational systems that have left many users [still too] trusting and rather uncritical in their engagement with others, facilitated by platforms that accumulate the data of millions.

In contrast to real life where embarrassing moments may have been passed on to a few only, the repair devices available online are much more limited, with control over systems often representing an illusion rather than a genuine back-up tool.

However, not engaging in online networking and not maintaining at least a marginal online presence could also turn out to become problematic: it seems the degree of presence, including the amount and content of data publicly available, searchable and retrievable is going to haunt and determine future decisions. Normalisation as underlying concept feeds into the pressure caused that requires users to construct and maintain a careful balance of identities which ideally promote their present and future goals – without even knowing where the professional career may take them in a rapidly changing and globalised world. Not to speak of their children who may suffer subsequently if their parents were too eager presenting them online at an early age – without informed consent.

Personally, I would like to see social media being used in a much more pro-active educational manner. I would also hope that curricula move towards a stronger proliferation of critical thinking rather than the adherence to fact-based assessment as it is common in some cultural contexts and some [academic] disciplines more than others. Currently, users largely depend on their level of curiosity, willingness to learn and inform themselves (basically determined by their existing social and cultural capital). Facebook’s ever changing small print (the same applies to many other sites) does not provide insight into long-term side effects and users seem to be other either slow or negligent in their responses to these changes. After all, many seem to argue, the service is free – also this an area which would require more critical questioning of capitalist business models -in disguise- that carry the price tag ‘free’.

What we seem to witness, is the lack of exactly these skills which constitute a large part of critical digital literacy based on the inconvenient truth that we all have developed one or more online personae that remain in the limelight. Forever celebrity 24/7.

Comment Pages:

Online Conference on Networks and Communities

A Virtual Collision: When your private and professional worlds clash

Comments

Categories

Tags

Latest comments

Meta