Company Stores Your Social Networking Slipups for 7yrs

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
And the frontrunner for "Most Hated Company 2011" is... Social Intelligence.

A company called Social Intelligence — which provides background checks for companies during the hiring process — recently drew ire from would-be employees due to its practice of building detailed files on applicants. The company keeps these records, which can contain embarrassing pictures or comments that have long since been deleted, in case they are requested by other potential employers in the future.
Click to expand...
 
Good thing I don't use my real name on Facebook. I don't use other social media at all, except LinkedIn, where I do use my real name, but that site is a glorified resume where nothing controversial ever goes.
 
Interesting. I can't say that I'm surprised, and it's nothing illegal (that I know of). It is what it is!
 
Good thing my name is misspelled on facebook, and I dont plan on changing it, lol.
 
Only my Cat has a facebook page. He hasn't been on recently though.
 
I think that it's for the best. We shouldn't be a part of those firms that wouldn't hire anyone that does not have information on social media sites (Facebook), and for those of us that employ, this social intelligence is fair game to read into in order to assess the applicant(s).
 
good luck -- just exactly how many "Jeff Johnson's" do you think are out there?


On top of that the only thing publicly available on my facebook is a standard every day picture with no other info. I actually ahve to know you for you to see my facebook page.
 
news flash.. set your facebook to private and dont friend every fucking random person
 
Yeah, this story comes as no suprise to me. But, as the person above me said - if you actually keep your profile private enough on Facebook, companies won't be able to SEE the things on your profile. 'Nuff said.
 
On one hand, I find it reprehensible that some potential employers consider a blatant invasion of privacy an acceptable practice for background checking. Last I checked, what I do in my non work hours is none of their business. On the other, I have little sympathy for people who post themselves doing utterly retarded shit on public sites like facebook. It doesn't affect me personally as I don't use social sites, but it is still galling that employers get away with it.
 
Data = $.

Though this should really only significantly affect the younger generation who feel the need to facebooks n twit every single ridiculous detail of their lives. Oh, and idiots too.
 
Reimu said:
I think that it's for the best. We shouldn't be a part of those firms that wouldn't hire anyone that does not have information on social media sites (Facebook), and for those of us that employ, this social intelligence is fair game to read into in order to assess the applicant(s).
Click to expand...

No. Not at all.

In fact, the hiring process has overstepped its bounds by a large margin and is far too invasive.

Credit Checks, Background Checks, Drug Checks, Social Media Checks, Private investigators.. It all goes beyond reason and a reasonable scope for the purpose of hiring.

It has become nothing more than a tool for leverage by bosses and corporations over their employees, race, economic and creed discrimination in disguise and its all a big show.

95% of jobs that are performed by people today have no relevancy to their private lives, only their academic and past job performance. A good resume, references and an interview should be all it takes to determine if someone should work for you. If you are in a financial service industry or secret clearance required job, a credit check and criminal background check should suffice as a supplemental.

Its absurd!
 
TheBluePill said:
If you are in a financial service industry or secret clearance required job, a credit check and criminal background check should suffice as a supplemental.
Click to expand...


A drug test should also be done. Maybe you don't have a criminal record, but your affiliations (drug dealer) probably does. Even if he doesn't, the fact that you're affiliated with a drug dealer, which ultimately leads at some point down the line, to organized crime, is a considerable issue.


I agree that for regular jobs, they're going way too far, but in some cases all these checks are justified.
 
Reimu said:
I think that it's for the best. We shouldn't be a part of those firms that wouldn't hire anyone that does not have information on social media sites (Facebook), and for those of us that employ, this social intelligence is fair game to read into in order to assess the applicant(s).
Click to expand...

I recommend listening to this story. it's a pretty funny account how that line of reasoning can go wrong. :p
 
mart20012 said:
A drug test should also be done. Maybe you don't have a criminal record, but your affiliations (drug dealer) probably does. Even if he doesn't, the fact that you're affiliated with a drug dealer, which ultimately leads at some point down the line, to organized crime, is a considerable issue.


I agree that for regular jobs, they're going way too far, but in some cases all these checks are justified.
Click to expand...

Agreed, there is no silver bullet for weeding out the good and bad at an appropriate level, but running everything under the sun plus digging up all of the dirt from a 7 year old myspace page is going way over the line.
 
Pretty sure a credit check is a good idea for someone in the accounting/finance industry. If you can't manage your own finances, why the heck should you be put in charge of millions of dollars of other people's money?
 
Cruiza said:
Pretty sure a credit check is a good idea for someone in the accounting/finance industry. If you can't manage your own finances, why the heck should you be put in charge of millions of dollars of other people's money?
Click to expand...

That not the intent of using Credit Reports in Hiring; It is supposed to be a gauge of how honest you are. Low Credit = Dishonest = Likely to Steal.

Same with Secret Clearance.
 
TheBluePill said:
That not the intent of using Credit Reports in Hiring; It is supposed to be a gauge of how honest you are. Low Credit = Dishonest = Likely to Steal.

Same with Secret Clearance.
Click to expand...

I think that's a little harsh. Poor credit can come about for many reasons, including a loss of a job (many people looking for work will have that problem).

I guess the rationale is that someone in dire financial straits might be more likely to be pressured into selling corporate/state secrets or something else.
 
TheBluePill said:
That not the intent of using Credit Reports in Hiring; It is supposed to be a gauge of how honest you are. Low Credit = Dishonest = Likely to Steal.

Same with Secret Clearance.
Click to expand...

Folks who are underwater in large amounts of debt or in collections are considered to have a high susceptibility to taking bribes, it has nothing to do with honesty.
 
It does suck that people's mistakes are going to be saved, but I have no pity for people who post that kind of stuff for the world to see.
 
If I were the employer, I'd look at this kind of information a little differently. I'd ask the potential employee about it, first asking permission of course to inquire about their private life (or whatever I'd need to do to be legal)

People learn from mistakes and sometimes come out the better from them. A snapshot of someone's life, one moment captured online, is just the cover and should not be used as the sole judge of a person (except in some extreme cases, of course)
 
Ok, if they are using/hoarding data, where do I send the Bill? They can't have my stuff for free. It belongs to me.

I'll be happy to rent it to them for 1 Million per year.
 
TechLarry said:
Ok, if they are using/hoarding data, where do I send the Bill? They can't have my stuff for free. It belongs to me.

I'll be happy to rent it to them for 1 Million per year.
Click to expand...
I'd suggest you read the EULA and Privacy Agreements on most social networking sites.
 
TechLarry said:
Ok, if they are using/hoarding data, where do I send the Bill? They can't have my stuff for free. It belongs to me.

I'll be happy to rent it to them for 1 Million per year.
Click to expand...

Well then you shouldn't have put the information into the public domain for everyone to see.


What most people here seem to be overlooking is that when hiring people, the trick is often finding someone with good judgement and who can be trusted.

Like it or not but people's actions in their private life can show that they have poor judgement and/or are not trustworthy and if they are dumb enough to post pictures and/or information showing thier poor judgement then once again they've shown poor judgement.

It's ironic how many people who feel that they need to put all their information out there for the world to see are the first ones to scream about privacy if the information they put out there is used in a way that might have a negative impact on them.
 
DarkStar_WNY said:
Like it or not but people's actions in their private life can show that they have poor judgement and/or are not trustworthy and if they are dumb enough to post pictures and/or information showing thier poor judgement then once again they've shown poor judgement.

It's ironic how many people who feel that they need to put all their information out there for the world to see are the first ones to scream about privacy if the information they put out there is used in a way that might have a negative impact on them.
Click to expand...

By that reasoning no company should ever hire a Christian, or believer in any other faith, as most companies seek rational individuals who make decisions based on data and objective evidence, not on gut feel or unproven beliefs. :p
 
Dekoth-E- said:
On one hand, I find it reprehensible that some potential employers consider a blatant invasion of privacy an acceptable practice for background checking.
Click to expand...

"Invasion of privacy"? lol, there's no "invasion of privacy" if you posted something on a public internet site.

Last I checked, what I do in my non work hours is none of their business. On the other, I have little sympathy for people who post themselves doing utterly retarded shit on public sites like facebook. It doesn't affect me personally as I don't use social sites, but it is still galling that employers get away with it.
Click to expand...

So you don't think that it's a potential employers business if you were some meth head that was dumb enough to post pictures of yourself hitting the pipe online? Just like you have the right to apply for work somewhere, they have the right to not hire you.
 
mart20012 said:
A drug test should also be done. Maybe you don't have a criminal record, but your affiliations (drug dealer) probably does. Even if he doesn't, the fact that you're affiliated with a drug dealer, which ultimately leads at some point down the line, to organized crime, is a considerable issue.


I agree that for regular jobs, they're going way too far, but in some cases all these checks are justified.
Click to expand...

Oh no, smoking weed is a sign of the DEBIL.
 
Chibo said:
Oh no, smoking weed is a sign of the DEBIL.
Click to expand...

No, it's not the devil, but it is illegal atm, so while you have the right to do what you like in the privacy of your own home, if one chooses to put pictures of themselves smoking from their awesome 6' bong on a public web page than they probably shouldn't expect that to not be used by a potential employer if they have access to it.
 
Chibo said:
Oh no, smoking weed is a sign of the DEBIL.
Click to expand...

Well, as far as drugs go weed is certainly one of the lest to be concerned about, but if for no other reason, weed has been known to zap its users of any and all of their motivation (except to eat munchies come up with weed jokes and artwork and seek out creative new ways to smoke their weed).

It sounds perfectly reasonable to me that companies might want to weed out (pun intended) those who are likely to be less motivated on the job, so they don't hire them, have to go through the expense of firing them when they find out how unmotivated they are, and then have to look for someone else to hire.
 
DarkStar_WNY said:
Well then you shouldn't have put the information into the public domain for everyone to see.


What most people here seem to be overlooking is that when hiring people, the trick is often finding someone with good judgement and who can be trusted.

Like it or not but people's actions in their private life can show that they have poor judgement and/or are not trustworthy and if they are dumb enough to post pictures and/or information showing thier poor judgement then once again they've shown poor judgement.

It's ironic how many people who feel that they need to put all their information out there for the world to see are the first ones to scream about privacy if the information they put out there is used in a way that might have a negative impact on them.
Click to expand...

But if the government did any of this, we'd be talking about Big Brother.

I find it kind of amusing people tend to let corporations do anything they please, even stuff that, if they government did, they'd be going ape shit berserk.

This country needs to stop bending over and taking it in the ass by the big corporate dildo.
 
Helicopter said:
No, it's not the devil, but it is illegal atm, so while you have the right to do what you like in the privacy of your own home, if one chooses to put pictures of themselves smoking from their awesome 6' bong on a public web page than they probably shouldn't expect that to not be used by a potential employer if they have access to it.
Click to expand...

Decriminalized where I am, only illegal because of the current political climate.
 
Zarathustra[H];1037415651 said:
It sounds perfectly reasonable to me that companies might want to weed out (pun intended) those who are likely to be less motivated on the job, so they don't hire them, have to go through the expense of firing them when they find out how unmotivated they are, and then have to look for someone else to hire.
Click to expand...
What about alcohol, gambling, etc?
 
Chibo said:
Decriminalized where I am, only illegal because of the current political climate.
Click to expand...

Just because personal posession is decriminalized in state laws, doesn't mean that its any less illegal. you are just les likely to be bothered by the local cops for it.

Posession, distribution and use is still a federal crime :p
 
Chibo said:
What about alcohol, gambling, etc?
Click to expand...

I'm fine with that.

It's in a employers interest to make sure they are hiring the best person for the job. The person who will do the highest quality work, the fastest, and work the hardest. If there is anything in a candidates personal life that suggests they may not be the best I think its fair game.
 
Zarathustra[H];1037415673 said:
Just because personal posession is decriminalized in state laws, doesn't mean that its any less illegal. you are just les likely to be bothered by the local cops for it.
Click to expand...

That's why I don't have a card ;) The government looks upon a medical card very harshly when considering for security clearances, judging by some of the released applications/denials.
 
Only people's info they can log are those people that make their profile public and if people do that then they are foolish.
 
"Social Intelligence Agency"

That's my view of them, and that's why I don't have any social networking profiles.
 
Gnasher said:
Only people's info they can log are those people that make their profile public and if people do that then they are foolish.
Click to expand...

I think having a private profile gives you a false sense of security. Just because it's private, doesn't mean the 200 people who can view it wont spread it.

All of my profiles are public. I don't post anything that I wouldn't want displayed on the front page of a newspaper. If you judge me from my profile, you'll find that my life is full of sports, beer, video games, friends and work. Pretty much your average 28 year old male.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top