Skip to main content

...They say don't talk politics or religion at work - wait, what about social media sites???

Beware, "Big Brother" is watching your every move online.  In this case "Big Brother" is a potential employer or current one that wants to know what your activities outside of work entail.  Those of us with nothing to hide may have no worries, but the "perspective" is in the eye of the HR person. One has to wonder if their personal views of say religion, politics or music for example, would be cause for pre-judgement by employers. In the current economic situation here in the U.S., I suspect "watching what you say online" is a harsh reality to how most people conduct themselves on the Web.  Apart from filtering your speech online, what about the personal photos of your "away-from-work" activities that can land someone in hot water with their employer.  Remember the story of the teacher who was fired when pictures of her vacation was posted on Facebook (article below)?  Mama always told me life's not fair! Also, the NY Times article below gives some staggering stats of how being socially online is being scrutinized by employers now in increasing numbers. Even with privacy settings available, it seems we have to be concerned to a degree.  Personally, I consciously will "do me" and either suffer the consequences or reap the benefits. 


http://shelley2503.wordpress.com/2010/07/21/smile-h-g-wells-big-brother-is-becoming-a-reality/

Also see :  http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/25/magazine/25privacy-t2.html?_r=1&src=twt&twt=nytimes

http://www.insideedition.com/news.aspx?storyId=3638

Comments

  1. I agree....you should not have to "hide" who you are within reason...I think activities separate from work that do not compromise your ability to effectively do your job when you at work, should not have any bearing on your career. People have always been people, and will continue to do so. We are not only our jobs, and there are many sides to people that aren't seen in the workplace.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with you completely - it's a harsh reality in today's world, however.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mel Gibson - Another audio tape released of a violent rant

It appears that a fourth tape of Mel Gibson's rants toward ex-lover Grigorieva has surfaced. CNN reports that Radar Online, an online magazine publication, released the forth in a series of tapes. The male voice on the tapes is said to be the actor Mel Gibson.  See the story at:  http://www.cnn.com/2010/SHOWBIZ/celebrity.news.gossip/07/14/mel.gibson.rant/index.html?iref=allsearch A handful of televised entertainment shows have recently played one or more of the released audio tapes. While the tape is said to "allegedly" contain Mel Gibson's voice, I've seen several TV programs where celebrities acquainted with Gibson admit the voice similarity is uncanny. Many fans (some now ex-fans) of Gibson's movies over the years, have blogged online that the voice sounds exactly like the actor. More importantly, in my opinion, is the tone of the threats and yelling heard on the tapes. If the voice is, in fact, Mel Gibson's - he needs professional help fast. The deat...

Cavaliers: Open Letter to Fans from Cavaliers Majority Owner Dan Gilbert

With the recent "uproar" of LeBron James' decision to leave the Cavs for the Heat - strange things are happening. While it's not strange for Cleveland to be upset at LeBron - that's a natural reaction if you have such a talented player. I believe it's "strange" to see such an angry "open letter" to fans by the owner, Dan Gilbert (see link below). Basketball is a sport, but it's a business as well. Sports athletes get traded, leave for other teams, get cut and lose their careers on a daily basis. Mr. Gilbert writes something in the letter about "having to do right by Cleveland or he's taking the curse down south" ( I'm paraphrasing). That leads me to believe there is more to this story than meets the eye. Is it possible that LeBron promised to stay in Cleveland and changed his mind? The owner mentions "betrayal" in the letter. Or, could it be the owner felt LeBron was "rubbing it in Cleveland's face...