RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Graves, Mark" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 18 Jun 2010 08:58:15 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (16 lines)
Yes, I think the juicier issue regarding privacy will definitely be around social networking.  When it reaches the courts, I'm sure the major issues will be around the nature of the network (there are BIG differences among Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn), and whether the employee is identifying him/herself as an employee of an organization.

Scenario 1: Employee posts, "My company is run by well-dressed orangutans" on Twitter (public posting, anyone can read it).  In past Twitter postings or in his public profile, the same employee identifies which company he works for.

Scenario 2: Employee posts, "My company is run by well-dressed orangutans" on Facebook (private status message, only open to friends and friends of friends).  Employee never identifies what company he works for.

Ideally, the employee in scenario 2 would be afforded much more privacy protection than employee in scenario 1.  I'm not a lawyer or a psychic (that I know of), but I'm sure the private sector privacy pendulum will swing the other way when a scenario 2 employee wins a major wrongful termination suit.

Mark Graves
Omaha, NE

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2