If you think that your Facebook and Twitter profiles won’t be looked at when you’re applying for a job, think again. The vast majority of employers are now searching through candidates’ social media accounts as part of the hiring process, new research finds.

A study from CareerBuilder revealed that 70 percent of employers now use social media to screen job candidates before hiring them, up from 60 percent a year ago. This also includes searches on Google, Yahoo and Bing,

But don’t let that stop you from posting online…and don’t delete your accounts altogether. That strategy could backfire! One-quarter of hiring managers expect candidates to have some sort of online presence, and nearly 60 percent are less likely to call someone in for interview if they can’t find them online.

“This shows the importance of cultivating a positive online persona,” Rosemary Haefner, chief human resources officer at CareerBuilder, said in a statement. “Job seekers should make their professional profiles visible online and ensure any information that could negatively impact their job search is made private or removed.”

Despite what you might think, most employers aren’t scouring the internet looking for reasons to not hire candidates. Most employers are actually trying to find reasons to hire someone.

The study found that 61 percent of employers conduct social screenings to look for information that supports a candidate’s qualifications for the job, 50 percent want to make sure the candidate has a professional online persona, and 37 percent want to see what other people are posting about the candidate. Just 24 percent of those surveyed check social media to search for reasons not to hire someone.

So what raises a red flag for employers?

The leading types of posts and behavior that left employers with a bad impression include:

• Candidate posted provocative or inappropriate photographs, videos or information.
• Candidate posted information about them drinking or using drugs.
• Candidate had discriminatory comments related to race, gender, religion.
• Candidate bad-mouthed their previous company or fellow employees.
• Candidate lied about qualifications.
• Candidate had poor communication skills.
• Candidate was linked to criminal behavior.
• Candidate shared confidential information from previous employers.
• Candidate’s screen name was unprofessional.
• Candidate lied about an absence.
• Candidate posted too frequently.

Professionals shouldn’t ease up on ensuring their online presence is a positive once they land a job. The study found that 51 percent of employers use social networking sites to research current employees. Of those, 34 percent have found content that caused them to discipline, or even fire, an employee.

The need to hide or remove any inappropriate content should be obvious, but having a clean and private profile doesn’t demonstrate who you are, and may even suggest you have something to hide, said Laura Betourne, a social media specialist at Uproar PR.

“Employers with a strong company culture are looking at more than just your job experience,” Betourne told Business News Daily. “Use your personal accounts to convey your personality, and share your hobbies and favorite pastimes.”

Although this research has become a popular trend, social media vetting is a contentious issue in the HR community. Some argue that the practice is unethical and violates candidates’ right to privacy. HR execs who turn a blind eye to social media have argued that the views and opinions people express in their free time have no bearing on their ability to get the job done. Still, HR teams who turn to social media often feel the information and photos posted on these platforms is in the public domain, and it would be foolish not to use it.

 

Social Media Vetting: Pros and Cons

Pro: It can give greater insight into an applicant’s abilities
A resume is a very small window into a potential employee’s work experience and qualifications. Sites such as LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter allow candidates a dynamic platform for exhibiting their work. Many journalists, photographers, and graphic designers share links to their clips on Facebook and Twitter, or specific portfolio sites like Behance and Contently.

Con: It could reveal protected information
Why do 80 percent of those surveyed avoid using social media to vet employees? A majority cite legal risk and the possibility of stumbling upon information that is usually protected including age, race and gender. Even when this information is obtained accidentally, if it has an impact on the ultimate hiring decision a candidate could argue discrimination.

Pro: It can reveal ugly incidents
Despite social media’s vast reach and public nature, candidates remain much more likely to be forthright in a tweet than they are in a job application or in-person interview. Social media sites are a good place to scan for potentially inappropriate behavior, such as overt acts of racism, sexism or other discriminatory behaviors. Hate speech can be a red flag for the HR team that a candidate might not fit into the organizational culture.

Con: It isn’t always reliable
In a world where Twitter accounts for brands like Burger King, Jeep and Fox News can get hacked, HR professionals can never be 100 percent certain that comments and content posted to a candidate’s page or wall is authentic. There’s always a potential for an HR professional to find an impostor account and mistake it for a valid one and the possibility of misconstruing pictures, messages or other information posted when this content is posted by someone with a similar name.

So who conducts Social Media Background Checks?

Social media vetting is time-consuming for hiring managers to do themselves. The American Bar Association recommends hiring a third-party vendor to conduct the social media searches. An added bonus: “Most helpful, a third party’s web-crawler system can typically review more webpages than an individual hiring manager tapping away at individual websites like Facebook and Twitter,” the ABA states.

The Bottom Line

It’s important to note that social media background checks make it easy for employers to find out information that can be held against you when you’re applying for jobs. Be cautious of what you post on social media, blogs, and other internet sites. The chances of someone finding information that could be damaging to your career are high. Your best bet is to be careful about what you post and to presume that what you post is public, despite any privacy settings you may have.

 

About Us: We have been mining social media since 2007 for our clients. By utilizing best in class software programs, we offer a service called eChatter. eChatter works with you to obtain your objectives in a fast, accurate and reliable facet. By keeping our strengthened principals, yet evolving with this industry, we lead in social media monitoring. Since 2007, we have been dedicated to providing our customers with the most authentic data.     We offer: ·       Deep Web Scans ·       Jury Vetting ·       Jury Monitoring ·       Quick Scan ·       Social Media Screenings     www.e-chatter.net (866) 703-8238

 

Those seemingly innocent emojis that we use daily…Did you know there is danger lurking behind them?

What can look harmless in a social media post or text message may have a different meaning to teens. The BBC Scotland recently aired a documentary on kids selling drugs online. An excerpt follows:

Teenagers are employing a code made up of ’emojis’ – small digital images normally used to convey emotions – to conceal the deals. One of the country’s largest drug gangs told a BBC documentary 75% of their takings now come through social media transactions, using ‘digital-savvy’ school pupils.

Film-maker Stacey Dooley confronted the young dealers, highlighting the ease with which illegal transactions can be arranged. One of them, 15-year-old ‘Denver’, was wearing his school uniform when he was filmed trying to sell her seven pills of MDMA, also known as ecstasy, at Maidstone railway station.

In the show, Stacey met Corey, from Glasgow, who said he’s been buying ecstasy since he was 12.

“It’s always been online for me,” he claimed, “It’s mainly through Snapchat and Instagram. You can get them in seconds straight to your door.”

“I think the draw to Snapchat is the fact that the messages aren’t permanent,” Corey observed. “You can speak to a larger amount of people and you can show it to people who are thinking about taking drugs.”

‘Digital’ Dealers

Using fake profiles on Instagram, Snapchat and the new ‘Tinder for Teens’ app Yellow, Stacey revealed how easy it is for children and young teens to get their hands on Class A drugs via seemingly unmoderated and unprotected social media platforms.

She was able to use emoji to ask for drugs and then arranged to meet and confront the ‘digital’ dealers.

What do you think? The more we know as parents and law enforcement professionals, the better. Social media is changing every day. 

 

 

 

 

 

Back in 2007, when social media first took off, monitoring social content started to come into play. As it progressed, so did monitoring techniques and uses. Retail brands find value in social data, as do HR departments, and even law enforcement. Recently social media monitoring has made the news, with the ACLU speaking out against monitoring used by law enforcement to track and identify potential threats. The ACLU maintains that this is not used solely for the purpose of tracking and identifying threats, but instead to profile certain groups of individuals. If you read my prior post on why I think the ACLU is wrong, you’ll know I strongly disagree with their opinions.

When I saw the news about smart technology recordings potentially being used as evidence, I wondered how the ACLU (and the general public) feel about this if there are such grave concerns about monitoring public social content. If you haven’t heard, police in Bentonville, Arkansas are asking Amazon to release recorded data from a murder suspect’s Echo – they served Amazon with a warrant to turn this over. At the time of this writing, Amazon has turned over the suspect’s account detail, including purchase history, but has refused to turn over recorded data.

It’s an interesting turn of events, and one that I believe will spark new laws and regulations, much like the controversy of unlocking an iPhone found earlier this year related to a terror incident.

So, will smart technology serve as a stream of potential evidence? It’s unclear exactly what is recorded with such devices, but in the case of Amazon’s Echo, it’s likely some content is recorded – after all, it has to “listen” for the command to start actively listening.

It doesn’t just stop with these speaker devices either – in the story of the murder suspect, police have also looked at his “smart” water meter – with that data, they were able to determine that there were 140 gallons of water used between 1am and 3am on the night of the murder. Police may presume that water was used to clean up evidence, and this data seems as though it was easily obtained.

This is an entirely new ballgame and very different from social media monitoring. If these smart devices have random recordings of private conversations, it opens up a whole new can of worms. Do the one and two party consent laws apply to smart devices? Can private conversations in one’s home be used as evidence? Do the manufacturers of these smart products have an obligation to turn over such data under a warrant?

Just like social media content, this is going to be a tricky, murky area that will take quite a bit of time to iron out. I anticipate it will be more difficult to set standards than it was with social media – after all, social media standards and laws surrounding its use are still being ironed out over a decade later.

How do you feel about this? Is this too much, or is it a necessary, useful tool to help law enforcement and even the government solve cases and mitigate potential threats to the general public? We’d love to hear your thoughts – feel free to share your thoughts below.

 

This week, Kim Kardashian was robbed in Paris. It’s a well known fact that the Kardashian’s love social media and the attention that comes from it – in fact, Kim alone has millions of followers on her social media sites.

Speculation abound, a recent article talks about the fact that she was a fairly easy target thanks to her social media activity. There are also suspicions that this could be a publicity stunt, but we’ll let the police determine that.

There are some good lessons that can be taken from this incident that you can put into practice on your own social media sites, whether this is in fact a real incident or even if it’s a hoax – you may not have millions of followers, but social media has definitely made it easier for criminals to do their work.

Be humble: you may be proud of your latest big purchase, whether it’s a new car, or jewelry, or the newest electronic gadget. Be cautious when posting – it may encourage criminals scouting your page to pay a visit to your home, especially if your social media profile is wide open to the public. Kim posted an image of her ring on Instagram which was immediately viewable by anyone who wanted to see it.

 

 

Save those vacation pics for your return home: or at least try to not disclose too much about your travels, such as the date and time you’ll return home (so people don’t know how long your house will be empty), or, better yet, save the picture uploads to share once you’re back home. If you enjoy sharing your travels as they are happening, be smart about it – be sure your privacy settings are as strict as possible so the images are only visible to friends and family. One thing in the Kardashian case is that they posted pictures along the way, making it easy for people to track their location and where they would be at any given time.

Keep your location quiet: You can still share vacation pics in real time if you are sure your phone’s GPS is turned off and your captions are more generic (ie “Having a great time at the beach!”). Criminals can find ways to find out the location from where an image is taken when a phone’s GPS or locator service is turned on.

Routines are easy to spot online: in a very random moment of complete boredom, I caught a portion of an episode of “Keeping up with the Kardashians” in which the older sisters were cautioning their youngest sister, Kylie, about posting on social media while out and about. From what I gathered, she had a stalker following her (or maybe she suspected she did; I didn’t watch long enough to figure it out). Her sisters chastised her for posting pictures from the restaurant and including the location of where they were. If you tend to check in to the same places online on a regular basis, it could give criminals insight into your routine.

These seem like common sense tips, but ones that tend to fall by the wayside. When you’re a celebrity, it’s much more difficult – social media brings attention and brand awareness, and fans want to see every detail of a celebrity’s life. The Kardashian family makes their living on this type of attention, but they can still be smart about it. When it comes to social media responsibility and sharing, don’t be a Kardashian!