Social networking classes for kids – adults need it too

If there are classes for children and their parents about appropriate use of social networking sites, why not the same for employees in the workplace?

Law.com social networking article misleading

Law Technology News part of Law.com  is publishing a series of articles on social networking in the workplace and here is their second article in the series.  They claim the goal of the article is to, “discusses the laws that impact social networking in the workplace and provides guidance on developing a social networking and blogging policy.”

However, I think its real goal is to attempt to create a social networking policy in the workplace that shields employers from litigation and that is a very different thing than creating a effective social networking policy.  Here are my five objections to their recommendations.

1. “Cover all forms of online communication and conduct.”  So does this include what I write on my Amazon reviews or Yelp?  Does this include my online banking transactions?  What about bidding on eBay items?  The list goes on and on.  And the authors of this article want the social networking policy to cover not only on the job “social networking” but anytime use of social networking.

2.  There is no definition of social networking.  This is particularly problematic given that new technology emerges very rapidly and the separation between on the job and off hours maybe blurred beyond recognition.  How will employees have any idea what is covered and what isn’t?

3.  The use of catch-all provisions.  Twice the article recommends that the employer create catch-all provisions, one that covers all local, state and federal laws and another one focused on covering all conflict of interests or “otherwise harms the employer’s business interests.”  Is there any doubt that this article is simply focused on shielding employers from potential litigation not to assist employers in writing a workable social networking policy?

4.  No discussion of the need to constantly monitor the policy in the face of rapidly changing technology?  Five years ago, no one was seriously thinking about the dangers of social networking in the workplace.  What about five years from now?  Do the authors really think that social networking technology won’t evolve further?

5.  No discussion of an employee training program in the appropriate use of social networking.  Just because social networking is pervasive doesn’t mean that everyone is knowledgeable in all the various social networking websites and potential uses and misuses.  Employees don’t simply need to be “aware” of the policy, they need to understand what exactly the policy refers to which will require training.

New York Times: protect your Facebook privacy!

“Considering that Facebook itself is no longer looking out for you, it’s time to be proactive about things and look out for yourself instead.”

This article give readers a step by step approach to protecting your Facebook information.  While I agree with much of this article, it does overstate the issue of user helplessness in the face of Facebook’s new privacy rule.  You can decide not to utilize Facebook as your online fraternity or sorority and simply stream acceptable information into your profile from your blog like I do.  Granted, its not as much fun but that’s okay with me.

Did Findlaw cross the line with blog post?

Eric Turkewitz of New York Personal Injury Law Blog  thinks Findlaw is exploiting the death of a child to advertise legal service.  Read the offending post here on The Philadelphia Personal Injury Law Blog.  His claim is that the blog exploits the victim providing little valuable legal commentary and provides a call to action to contact specific attorneys.

Here’s my devil’s advocates position:

1.  The claim that the post adds little content beyond the local story.  The additional content includes four paragraphs.  Besides the questions the blogger poses which Mr. Turkewitz mocks, the blogger includes a section from a relevant statute and interprets what it says.  While Mr. Turkewitz might find this information banal, the target audience of this blog is ostensibly consumers.  They may not have considered these questions or the relevant code section.  If this information is wrong or misleading, then that’s a different and significant problem but I’m not in any position to assess that.

2.  Call to action.  The blogger simply says, “could discuss the possible personal injury case with a PA personal injury attorney.”  This statement is neither specific to any attorney(s) not is it touting the value of doing so.  The blogger doesn’t say this will ”improve your chances of winning in court” by contacting these attorneys.  The link is to the Findlaw legal directory and contains a list of 60 attorneys for a consumer to choose from.  Does the link help Findlaw help drive relevant traffic to these attorneys websites?  Yes.  Is the link advertising the quality of these attorneys?  No.

While I can see that the potential for this activity to exploit the misery of victims, I can also see that the blog post provides valuable information to consumers both about what issues and laws are involved in a hit and run accident.  It also  links  to a directory of attorney websites they can check out for themselves.  I think its over-stating the case to call this exploitation.  For me, if the blogger just linked the hit and run story and then plugged a specific lawyer praising the ability to handle such cases, that would be exploitive.

Mr. Turkewitz ends his post with the following: “The only way for FindLaw’s clients to preserve their reputations appears to be to ship out, because it doesn’t appear that FindLaw will shape up.”

Findlaw is owned by Thomson Reuters which reported revenue of  $11 billion last year and they own Westlaw, West Publishing, Hubbard One and Hildebrandt just to name a few companies in their legal services division.  I would be surprised if Mr. Turkewitz doesn’t pay Thomson Reuters for casebooks or Westlaw and I wonder if he thinks there is a bright line that separates Findlaw from the company that owns and controls Findlaw, the exploiter of dead children ?

Frankly, I am more upset about Thomson Reuters and Reed Elsevier (owner of Lexis/Nexis) and their control of legal information services and how that chills competition, than I am about this blog post.

Chicago tenant wins Twitter case

I posted back in July that, ““A Chicago-area woman is being sued for $50,000 by her landlord over a critical Tweet.”  This week the judge hearing the case.  The tenant had tweeted about mold in one of the landlord’s apartments.  For this the landlord sued.  The judge simply said, “the court finds the tweet nonactionable as a matter of law.”

That means the judge didn’t even find the tweet meeting the legal definition of defamation.  So the tenant won, right?

Well, think about being the subject of a high profile lawsuit with your landlord for more than six month for which you had to hire an attorney.  Maybe the landlord won because now its tenants are relunctant to tweet their rental complaints.

Friday Freebie: JPG To PDF Converter

JPG To PDF Converter is a windows utility that quickly convert multiple images into a single pdf document. With JPG To PDF Converter users can create pdf files from image formats like JPG, GIF, BMP, TIF, PNG and PSD. 

Freebie Link.

Facebook privacy issues: FTC is interested

Electronic Privacy Information Center filed a complaint against Facebook’s new privacy rules and it appears this got the attention of the FTC which responded, “”Your most recent complaint raises issues of particular interest for us at this time.”

Article here.

Claim your name on Twitter etc.

When I work with attorneys on marketing, I discuss the benefits of blogging and the like.  If being active on social networking isn’t their thing, that’s fine.  Better to accept that than expend lots of time, energy and possibly money on an initiative that doesn’t fit the lawyer’s personality or inclinations.

However…

Claim your name on all your social networking outlets in particular the big ones like Linkedin, Twitter, Facebook and the like.  Why?  Because someone could claim your identity and cause all kinds of havoc.  Here is R. David Donoghue’s advice about how to stop Twitter identity thieves.

Catching prison escapees using Facebook

“For instance, if a prisoner escapes somewhere nearby, we could post it on Facebook,” So says Joshua McMillan of the Russellville Arkansas police.

Suddenly, I have this image of a New Yorker cartoon where a woman is on the couch huddled over her laptop while her husband sits in his recliner reading the newspaper.  A man in prisoner garb is peering through the window. 

And the woman says, “Honey, the police say my new Facebook friend, Bruce, just escaped from the county jail.”

Different rules for teen social media sites?

A Canadian watchdog group, Public Interest Advocacy Centre has filed a complaint against Nexopia, a social networking site aimed at teens.  The site bills itself as a place teens can come and express themselves.  The problem is that this expression gets served up in Google so that the whole world can learn about a teens private concerns which they shouldn’t be expected to guard against.