SPE 210 Blog # 3 Evidence Assessment

                There are definitely multiple ways of viewing the argument of whether or not employers should be allowed to use social media sites during the interview process or on their current employees. Some believe that it should be allowed, while others believe it should not. Then, some people believe it should be used during the interview process only, while others think it is ok to use the social sites on current employees or once someone is employed. This is clearly a very controversial topic because of the huge effect it has on people and their jobs during these hard economic times

                A major case concerning employers using social media was brought up in Maryland in 2011. A man was going for a job with the Department of Corrections of Maryland and was forced to give up his facebook password. When he did, the interviewer checked his facebook and the man was ultimately not hired for the job (Madrigal, 2011).

                Concerning the standpoint from the employers, the use of social media sites has helped them avoid hiring problematic people. In a New York Times article, there were over two thousand managers and human resource workers questioned and it turned out than thirty five percent of employers did not offer a job to a potential candidate because of content on their social media site. This helped employers in this case because it allowed the employers to dig beneath the surface and see what kind of person they were really hiring, not just the person who showed up for the interview (Wortham, 2009).

                In an article in the Washington Post, employers argue that checking social media sites of potential employees or those who are already employed is no different than doing a drug test. There may be a completely different life for someone outside of the workplace that can ultimately damage their job. Employers will see a nice clean cut person show up for the interview, then find things on their social media pages such as displays of weapons, sexually explicit photos, racist remarks, and references to drug use (Bell, 2011).

                On the contrary, an article in the Chicago Tribune that featured state rep La Shawn Ford argued that checking the social media sites or forcing someone to turn their password over is a violation of someone’s right to privacy. The state rep completely agreed as well. People are fearful that they will get fired over private information or something that was a harmless inside joke between friends that may be viewed differently by an employer (Rueff, 2012).

                Lastly, another article in the New York Times gave examples of employers who avoided very problematic people that were being considered for hire. One employer talked about how he discovered one potential employee was found searching for oxycontin on craig’s list, and another woman who posted naked photos of herself. There was another employer who gave the example of someone who he was considering for the job, then saw pictures of the potential employee with guns standing in front of illegal marijuana plants.

                Whether or not employers should be allowed to check social media sites is clearly a controversial topic that affects everyone. It will affect the way everyone goes for a job one day, or maybe a child whose parents cannot get a job because of what is on their social media sites. In other words this topic can affect an entire family, not just one person.