Noah Minch

Cain

Block. 2

December 11, 2017

Annotated Bibliography

Nikravan, Ladan. “Number of Employers Using Social Media to Screen Candidates Has

Increased 500 Percent over the Last Decade.” CareerBuilder.com, 28 Apr. 2016,

www.careerbuilder.com

This text is chocked full of useful statistics regarding the utility of social media for employers

and the rising use of media for judging job applicants. The document gives light on the

increasing usage of media by giving slat statistics like, “59 percent of hiring managers use search

engines to research candidates – compared to 51 percent last year.”(Ladan) The research was

publish in 2016, making very applicable today, and was published by the website

CareerBuilder.com, a site that several magazine and news articles cite across the country for

work based statistical information. In a research paper, this source could be used to make the

argument that employers lean too much on external sources for information about their

applicants. It could also be used to make the argument that checking information in the public

domain is a social norm, even for employers, and thus acceptable.

Jon Brodkin - Mar 21, 2013 7:30 pm UTC. “How ‘Dongle’ Jokes Got Two People Fired—and

Led to DDoS Attacks.” Ars Technica, 21 Mar. 2013, arstechnica.com

This article and scenario has been presented in a number of popular text and articles, including

our class book “So you’ve been publicly shamed”. In the topic of employment based upon Social
mass media, it is very difficult to neglect this story, as it very controversial and widespread. We

know that this article is credible because almost all the controversy was based around the

primary sources, the twitter post, and we can trust what the article has to say because it comes

from the reputable ArsTechnica site. In an essay, this document could be used to argue that

social media should not have an influence on individuals and their employment. This document

could also support the opposing direction, that mass media gives power to the people, and that

the people have the freedom to say whatever they want and fire anyone they so choose.

Delarosa, Jennifer. “From Due Diligence To Discrimination: Employer Use of Social Media

Vetting In The Hiring Process And Potential Liabilities.” Digitalcommons.lmu.edu, 6

Jan. 2015, digitalcommons.lmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article.

This document comes from a college database and outlines some issues that current law has with

social media and workplace hiring practices. This text identifies where the grey areas occur

within law. The text offers a lawyers views on an workplace ethics case, where an applicant was

refused for a job he was over qualified for, and instead a much less suited and less experienced

individual was given the job instead. The applicant believes he was turned down because of

somethings he’s said about creationism on social media, which is what turns his circumstance

into a potential ethics case. The author of the document makes that point very clearly when they

state, Social media screening creates a greater possibility of disparate treatment (treating an

applicant differently because of a protected class status) than many other selection methods due

to protected class status information prevalent on social media sites not otherwise gleaned from a

resume.”(page 262) The article, having come from the data base of a law school is quite credible,

and can be used to argue some of the legal pros and cons of workplace social media policy.
Jackson, Nicholas. “Infographic: How Employers Use Social Media to Hire and Fire.” The

Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 15 Aug. 2011, www.theatlantic.com

This visual show statistical information on how and what employers are looking for when they

check their applicant’s social media. The information here differs from the statistics given

earlier, because it give more specified information of characteristics and traits being sought after,

and less information of the growth of social media. The information was published by the

Atlantic Media company, which has a good reputation for being credible, and the article was

published in 2011, which was some time ago. Thankfully, legal policy and practice has barely

changed in the past ten years, so this information is still very much applicable. This article could

be used to emphasis how unfair it is for work places to judge based upon their profile images, or

this article could be used to support cleaner behavior amount the whole population of the

internet, and to encourage that work places to online screenings.

“42 U.S. Code § 2000e–2 - Unlawful Employment Practices.” LII / Legal Information Institute,

www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/2000e-2.

This text is a direct quotation of laws that have been passed to make unethical hiring decisions

illegal. This is title seven of the civil rights act of 1964. This document shows the specifics and

stipulations of the law, like for example, “Employment agency practices

It shall be an unlawful employment practice for an employment agency to fail or refuse to refer

for employment, or otherwise to discriminate against, any individual because of his race, color,

religion, sex, or national origin, or to classify or refer for employment any individual on the basis

of his race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.”(Title 7b) While the movement was passed in

the 60’s, the law is still in effect today, making it credible. This document could be used to
question the legal standing of judgement made on applicants based on social media, and whether

or not companies or operating on biases instead of work ethic.

Hashmy-Els, Saadia. “Think before You Overshare.” BBC, BBC, 27 Aug. 2016,

www.bbc.com/capital/story/20160826-think-before-you-overshare-yes-it-can-get-you-

fired

This article tells another story about how social media can have a negative impact on the

employees, and how an employer’s ability to screen their employees strips some of the

rights away from them. It also evaluates how even the most innocuous post, like a

bathing baby, can result in harsh backfire. The author makes a good point when she

states, “She effectively posted that her manager was an idiot and incompetent in his role –

potentially a form of cyber-bullying,” says Knowles. “Word made its way back to her

employer, including her manager and disciplinary proceedings for gross misconduct were

initiated. “All the employer needed to show was that the posts could have caused offence

or damaged the company’s reputation,” (Saadia) She almost raises the question of what is

more valuable, the image of the company, or the rights of the individual? The article

comes from the BBC, which is a company with a great news coverage on current global

affairs, and the article was written recently, making it still very applicable. The article

could be used to argue in either direction. Some arguments urging change could be use

this argument to defend the right to privacy, whereas others would argue companies

should have the right to fire employees who slander their own companies.