By Katana Liebelt
It is a truth nationally acknowledged that employers will use social media to determine whether to hire job applicants. According to a 2020 Harris Poll study for Express Employment, 71% of U.S. hiring decision makers agree that it is effective to screen potential employees’ social media accounts (Stoller). Nearly 67% of these decision makers use social media to research their employees; out of this group, 55% of them discover posts that stop them from hiring applicants (Stoller, 2020). Furthermore, even when applicants get jobs, they can easily lose them because of a post. Using social media for hiring decisions was more controversial 10 years ago than today (Boling, Mass Communication class, 2022); however, the issue is still relevant. In 2020, Claira Janover posted a TikTok video, saying, “The next person who has the sheer nerve to say ‘all lives matter’, Imma stab you. Imma show you my paper cut and say, ‘my cut matters too’” (New York Post, 2020). Janover then lost her two-week internship at Deloitte, a financial services firm (Brown & Feis, 2020; Deloitte, n.d.). Although this was an extreme example, it demonstrates how employees can lose their jobs due to what they post on social media.
To understand this controversy better, one must consider the history of social media and the internet. Throughout the 1990s and 2000s, communication was either one-to-one or one-to-many. However, in the early 2000s, social media dramatically affected communication (Campbell et. al, 2020, p. 259). Social media sites made the norm of internet communication many-to-many. Starting with MySpace, (Myers & Hamilton, 2015), social media allowed people to “follow” and communicate with each other. They could have real-time conversations, write or read comments, share photos and videos, and interact virtually (Campbell et. al, 2020, p. 259) Then, in 2004, Mark Zuckerberg invented Facebook, which eventually displaced MySpace because it was more “controlled, structured, and user-friendly” (Myers & Hamilton, 2015, p. 229; Brown & Vaughn, 2011, p. 220). By 2008, Facebook became the largest social media platform, blurring the boundary between private and public (Brown & Vaughn, 2011, p. 220). Over the past few decades, many media have converged their functions in one place: social media (Campbell et. al, 2020, p. 262). This phenomenon has changed all contexts of communication, including employer-employee and job seeker-hiring manager relationships.
Society today must learn to distinguish between private versus public communication, and personal versus professional content. Because of social media, these controversies are interchangeable. They create confusion and can lead to major consequences like losing a job. For instance, in 2013, Jessica Bibbs posted on Facebook that her job was “a joke” (qtd. in Valinsky, 2013). Bibbs regretted posting it, yet simultaneously did not “because [she felt] like those were [her] feelings” (qtd. in Valinsky, 2013). Unfortunately for her, Bibbs underestimated the extent to which messages could spread (Mills, 2017, p. 48). According to Mills (2017), sharing on social media undermines people’s behavioral standards with acquaintances and strangers (p. 48). He also argues that people tend to share more information if they know—in Bibbs’s case, think, —the information will remain secure (2011, p. 50). Moreover social media is still fairly new, so its use strains the already complicated relationship between hiring managers and job seekers.
Meanwhile, in Europe, social media users view privacy based on the type of information and who has access to it (Sarikakis & Winter, 2017, p. 6). This perspective comes from the idea that people have “ownership” over personal data. Thus, Europeans interpret the right to privacy as protection over information that is considered private (2017, p. 6). Sarikakis and Winter also explain that people’s ability to use technology is a major factor for maintaining privacy and control. Citing Brandimarte, Acquisiti, and Loewenstein, Sarikakis and Winter claim that the more control people have over information, the less concern they have about privacy. Consequently, people increasingly post sensitive information (2017, p. 4). However, people must share their information responsibly. Just because they can control their privacy does not mean they should post sensitive information. Based on these scholars’ views of privacy, social media posts are not private. As demonstrated by the cases of Janover and Bibbs, posts can become widely public. When people post on social media, they risk having their boss or co-workers find it, regardless of their privacy settings. Therefore, companies can use social media to make hiring decisions.
Literature Review
Determining what is private versus public content is complicated. Between 2004 to 2014, England treated invasions of privacy as breaches of confidence (Mills, 2017, p. 51). According to Mills (2017), if information was disclosed in certain relationships (e.g., doctor-patient), it was considered “confidential”(p. 51). However, “confidential” changed to include information that was intrinsically secret or private (e.g., a medical issue) (Mills, p. 51). Based on England’s attitude, privacy includes information that people want kept secret regardless of when or where it was shared.
Additionally, in 1988 during Stephens v Avery, Sir Nicholas Browne-Wilkinson ruled that information was not protected or confidential when many people know it (Mills, 2017, p. 51). Based on this definition, posts on social media are not considered private or confidential. However, England has provided different standards for what information is considered public domain (Mills, p. 53). Public domain depends upon whether the post has substantial followers, easy accessibility, and impact on further publication in mass media (Mills, pp. 53, 54, 59, 60). In England “substantial followers” varies from two-figure numbers to 56,000 followers (p. 54). Past cases in England deem information accessible when the general public can easily find it on the internet (pp. 59, 60). Regarding privacy, England also considers the effect of further publication on mass media other than the initial social media post (Mills, p. 56). As Lord Neuberger said, a story distributed through mass communication is more credible than a social media post (as cited in Mills, p. 56). England’s past decisions provide standards for privacy regarding social media. They offer a thorough foundation for determining privacy in hiring decisions in America.
Three communication theories apply to the social media and hiring decisions debate: identity management theory, self-monitoring theory, and the network theory of privacy. Identity management theory involves managing and maintaining face-identity among various cultures. Within this theory, face-work (changing face) is influenced by one’s cultural and relational identities (Communication Theory, n.d.). When interacting with other cultures, people must find similar points of interests or aspects and reshape how they present themselves based on their relationship with the person (relational identity) (Communication Theory, n.d.). According to William Cupach and Tadasu Imahori, successful communication requires someone to “negotiate the mutually acceptable identities in interactions” (as cited in Communication Theory, n.d.). Within social media, cultures include work and personal lives. As established earlier, people tend to share more information online because they underestimate how much it can spread (Mills, 2017, pp. 48, 50). Thus, their jobs suffer because they do not present identities acceptable for work. In essence, posting displays personal information and beliefs in a public setting. If people present what their employees also find acceptable, they could reduce the likelihood of getting looked over or fired. Nevertheless, people do manage their identity across cultures by using different accounts for different purposes: LinkedIn for professional cultures and Facebook or Instagram for personal yet public cultures (Robards & Graf, 2022, p. 2). Thus, identity management is something people should improve upon. Another theory related to identity management is the self-monitoring theory, where the individual monitors social situations and “alters [his or her behavior] to impress others” (Westfall, 2020). Based on how employers use social media, they seem to want their employees to self-monitor. It therefore benefits employees (applicants or current ones) to self-monitor within their work culture, including their social media.
Discussion
Although companies should use social media to make hiring decisions, they must evaluate its risks and benefits, as revealed by Victoria R. Brown and E. Daly Vaughn (2011). Certain industries or sectors are more public, which cause them to hold their employees to higher accountability (Robards & Graf, 2022, p. 10). The industries with the highest number of firings include education, law enforcement, and health (p. 10). Media was the most common industry (p. 10). Robards and Graf studied and coded 312 news stories[MT1] about people getting fired, acknowledging they used a small sample size (pp. 2, 11). Because these industries are accountable and public, their companies should use social media to fire their employees.
Furthermore, according to Brown and Vaughn (2011), judgments based on social media information are usually accurate (p. 219). Brown and Vaughn assert that users are unable to tailor for a wide audience, meaning they compromise and present stable samples (p. 222). Thus, employers can trust social media to see their applicants’ or employees’ true nature. This means they can confirm whether an applicant’s resume was accurate, discover inaccuracies, and conduct research cheaply (Brown & Vaughn, 2011, p. 220). Using social media uncovers important, helpful information. According to a 2009 Career Building Survey, employers found provocative and inappropriate photos, poor communication skills, evidence of drugs and alcohol, and evidence of falsifying resumes (as cited in Brown & Vaughn, 2011, p. 220). These things are important for employers to know; they also are important things that people should avoid posting.
Using social media to make hiring decisions seems to cross privacy boundaries. However, most[MT2] pictures on social media are public and accessible to anyone. If people display publicity-seeking behavior they should not expect privacy (Mills, 2017, pp. 51, 62). Publicity-seeking involves “acknowledging popularity as a goal[,]…constructing an image of self that can be easily consumed by other,…attract[ing] attention and interest, [trying] to increase one’s desirability and ultimately lull one’s viewers into a state of veneration” (Marwick & Boyd, qtd. in Mills, p. 62). Social media are public domains, although this categorization depends upon the number of followers one has (Mills, p. 53). For instance, in McAlpine v Bercow, Bercow, the defendant, had 56,000 followers on Twitter, while The Independent (a British newspaper) had 57,930 followers (Mills, p. 54). This demonstrates that social media posts can spread beyond their intended audience (Mills, 2017, p. 48). When people use social media, their information becomes public. To compare, celebrities are exempt from privacy (Mills, p. 6). Since social media users—especially famous ones—tend to have publicity-seeking behavior, their situation is like that of celebrities’ (Mills, 2017, p. 62). If people are trying to get famous, then they will limit their right to privacy (Mills, 2017, p. 62). Hence, hiring managers can use social media without crossing boundaries.
However, as Brown and Vaughn (2011) acknowledge, there are risks involved in using social media to make hiring decisions. Therefore, one could argue that employers shouldn’t use social media. For instance, a GoAir pilot got fired for a tweet. However, this pilot claimed that the tweet belonged to a different person with the same name (Robards & Graf, 2022, p. 9). Although this pilot received death threats, he was fortunately rehired (2022, p. 9). The GoAir pilot’s situation was resolved; but it revealed how using social media to fire people enables the digital mob (Batza as qtd. in 2022, p. 9). Followers’ reactions can lead to people getting fired, (Robards & Graf, 2022, pp. 9–11), an invasive and sometimes violent process; on the other hand, social media pressure can sometimes lead to employee’s being rehired (p. 8), No matter what, firing “canceled” employees based on social media can be toxic (Robards & Graf, 2022, pp. 9–11). By using social media, employers involve bystanders in matters between employers and employees. Whether the public’s involvement is good or bad, it adds another layer of communication between employers and staff not usually seen in the past.
Another issue stems from the employers themselves rather than the public. Employers can discriminate against people based on race, gender, sex, and sexual orientation (Brown & Vaughn, 2011, pp. 219, 221, 223). This is because there is often a lack of clear connection between job requirements (constructs) and screening social media (Brown & Vaughn, 2011, p. 220). Furthermore, employers could commit “fundamental attribution error,” which means they think the social media post represents the person regardless of the post’s context (Brown & Vaughn, 2011, p. 221). Though people should be careful, employers may also reject a qualified candidate because they only saw “that one post”. The reverse is also true. To appear more desirable, candidates may also distort their social media posts by using self-monitoring to appear more desirable than is true (Brown & Vaughn, 2011, p. 220). This is bad because the employer could hire someone based on inaccurate information. For example, the candidate could portray herself as wise, patient, and hardworking on her Instagram posts. But once she gets hired, she starts complaining and lashing out at co-workers. Overall, social media does not show everything about a person; hence, it may lead employers to make faulty hiring decisions.
All these risks make great arguments against using social media for hiring decisions. However, employers can reduce these risks. Both Robards & Graf (2022) and Brown & Vaughn (2011) propose excellent solutions. Brown and Vaughn propose that Human Resources managers should explain how looking through social media helps their personnel find relatable job skills (p. 221). Companies should decide what job skills or requirements they could look for when they screen social media (2011, p. 222). If Human Resources staff members find information not directly relevant to the job, they should consider looking for higher-order constructs such as “cognitive ability, professionalism, personality” (p. 222). To ensure this process is fair and uniform, Human Resources departments should create a rubric for systematic screening. Since applicants allow different levels of access to their social media profiles, the rubrics should provide examples of positive or negative signs in a profile (2011, p. 222). By establishing standards, companies ensure that their hiring processes are fair and informed. Hence, if people don’t follow the standards, then the company can more concretely deal with the issues.
Readers should note that Robards and Graf (2022) lay most of the blame critic for social-media-related firings upon the employers, recruiters, and Human Resources managers. They believe that firing based on social media creates “a hidden curriculum of surveillance” (2022, p. 11). However, applicants still play a part in getting fired. To reiterate, self-monitoring involves choosing how to present oneself in social situations: social media intertwines many situations into one (Campbell et. al, 2020, p. 262; Brown & Vaughn, p. 221). Both applicants and employees can choose what they post.
Nevertheless, Robards and Graf (2022) provide solutions involving personal responsibility. They suggest balancing different audiences by separating work from other parts of life (Robards & Graf, 2022, p. 2). They also suggest making privacy settings within one’s profile to restrict who can see which posts (2022, pp. 2, 3). These tips align with identity management, which says that communication is successful when one monitors what is mutually acceptable in a relational context (Communication Theory, n.d.). Within the social media-hiring decision situation, the relational context is work.
Conclusion
Social media is a widespread tool on the Internet that allows for various types of communication. Employers have used it to decide whether to hire candidates. They have also used it to fire employees for unprofessional posts. This action is not considered a breach of privacy since most people post publicly. Despite privacy settings or estimation of privacy, social media posts can easily reach beyond their intended audience (Mills, 2017, p. 62). These posts often provide accurate insights into applicants and employees (Brown & Vaughn, 2011). However, using social media can also lead to discrimination or misjudgment (Brown & Vaughn; Robards & Graf, 2022). Nevertheless, if employers clearly connect their social media search with the job requirements, then they can solve some problems using social media. Therefore, because social media is public, employers should use it to determine whether to hire or fire applicants and employees.
Although using social media is accepted among most people, it still may be controversial to others, especially when posts are inflammatory or political in nature. But if the search is done properly, then using social media can help employers make informed decisions. If people feel upset, then they should use privacy settings, separate their different life aspects (professional vs. personal), and consider what they post.
References
Brown, L., & Feis, A. (2020, July 1). Harvard grad Claira Janover says she’s lost Deloitte job over
TikTok ‘stab threat.’ New York Post. https://nypost.com/2020/07/01/harvard-grad-claira-
janover-lost-deloitte-job-over-tiktok-stab-threat/.
Brown, V. R., & Vaughn, E. D. (2011, May 4). The writing on the (Facebook) wall: The use of
social networking sites in hiring decisions. Journal of Business & Psychology, 26(2), 219–225.
DOI 10.1007/s10869-011-9221-x.
Campbell, R., Martin, C. R., Fabos, B., & Harmsen, S. (2020). Media essentials a brief introduction
(5th ed.). Bedford St. Martin’s.
Communication Theory. (n.d.). Identity management theory.
https://www.communicationtheory.org/identity-management-theory/.
Deloitte. (n.d.). About us. Retrieved November 1, 2022, from
https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/about-deloitte/articles/about-deloitte.html?
The Financial Confessions. (2016, March 16). The financial confessions: “I lost my job over a social
media post.” The Financial Diet, https://thefinancialdiet.com/financial-confessions-lost-job-
Mills, M. (2017). Sharing privately: The effective publication on social media has on expectations of
privacy. Journal of Media Law, 9(1), 45-71.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2016.1272235.
Myers, C., & Hamilton, J. F. (2015). Open genre, new possibilities: Democratizing history via social
media. Rethinking History, 19(2), 222–234.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13642529.2014.973712.
New York Post. (2020, July 1). Harvard graduate on TikTok threatens to ‘stab’ anyone who says ‘all lives
matter’ | New York Post [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Ca8iZupKjI.
Robards, B., & Graf, D. (2022, March 3). “How a Facebook update can cost you your job”: News
coverage of employment terminations following social media disclosures, from racist cops to
queer teachers. Social Media + Society, 8(1), 1-13.
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F20563051221077022.
Sarikakis, K. & Winter, L. (2017, February 1). Social media users’ legal consciousness about privacy.
Social Media + Society, 3(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F2056305117695325.
Stoller, B. (2020, October 14). 71% of hiring decision-makers agree social media is effective for
screening applicants. CISION.
https://www.prweb.com/releases/71_of_hiring_decision_makers_agree_social_media
_is_effective_for_screening_applicants/prweb17467312.htm.
Valinsky, J. (2013, February 26). Woman fired after calling job “a joke” on Facebook. Daily Dot.
https://www.dailydot.com/news/jessica-bibbs-facebook-job-joke-fired/.
Westfall, R. S. (2020, September 18). Self-monitoring, theory of. In B. J. Carducci & C. S. Nave
(Eds.), The Wiley encyclopedia of personality and individual differences. John Wiley & Sons.