[Opinion] Should an Employer be Allowed to Check a Candidates's Social Media when Hiring?

[Image Source: pixabay.com, License: CCO Public Domain]

Maintaining privacy is one of the largest challenges in modern society; but does that privacy extend as far as social media? Does an employer have the right to check a potential employee’s social media accounts when the employer may be putting their company’s private information on the line?

The struggle to maintain privacy started far before the information age; so what is the history of social media and the history of privacy? People have fought for the right to live a private life ever since the signing of the Magna Carta in the year 1215. But, the Magna Carta only had an effect on Noblemen. It wasn’t until the writings of John Locke that average people, or peasants, began to fight for the right to a private life (Henderson 7). Social media first came into main stream popularity with the creation of Friendster by Jonathan Abrams in 2002. This was the first social media platform for computers, and introduced the idea of grouping communities around people or social niches, rather than topics such as science or programming (Hillstrom). But, with the creation of social media, people may have taken a step backward with maintaining privacy (“Pro: Social-media check”). In the eyes of the government, the fourth amendment protects Americans from unreasonable search and seizure, but what about private employers and their ability to delve into employees’ private life?

The fourth amendment only applies to the government, so private employers should have the right to require a social media check before hiring. The United States Constitution demonstrates that the Founding Fathers had deep concerns about maintaining citizen privacy from the government. Especially considering that several amendments indirectly address privacy. “In particular, the fourth amendment states: ‘The rights of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized’” (Henderson 8). This means that citizens have the right to privacy in physical or intellectual aspects “persons, houses, papers, and effect . . .” However, the fourth amendment only applies to the government, meaning that private employers should have the right to require access to social media accounts to hire as long as they acquire access through the potential employee. But, in the case of government, requiring social media to hire is a violation of the 4th amendment. Not only can an employee have their reputation exposed through social media, but a private company is putting its reputation on the line by hiring an employee.

Many employers put their company’s private information and reputation on the line by hiring employees. If the employer does not know that their employee is irresponsible, and could leak their private information, they could wind up going out of business. So, shouldn’t a private employer have the right to see how a potential employee actually acts? “Careerbuilder.com released a survey from 2009 which showed 45 percent of employers polled used social media sites to screen potential employees” (“Pro: Social media check”). This shows that almost half of the employers polled find it necessary to check their potential employees’ social media. However, this does not apply to government.

The government does not have the right to check the social media of potential employees. The government has the power to send someone to jail. If they find something they don’t like (your political party, or beliefs you have), they could try to send you to jail (shut you up). “18th-century British statesman William Pitt declared in a speech before Parliament: ‘The poorest man may, in his cottage, bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. It may be frail, its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storm may enter; the rain may enter; but the king of England may not enter; all his force dares not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement’ Privacy, like freedom of speech and press, emerged as rights that could be asserted against the government. Meanwhile, the political reformers of the late 17th and 18th centuries replaced the ideas of absolute monarchy with the growing power of a Parliament that represented the people (although admittedly only males with a certain degree of economic status were truly represented)” (Henderson 7). This means that we have progressed in privacy for citizens over the centuries. So, why take a step backwards and give our rights back to the government? I feel that privacy from the government is one of the most important rights to maintain. Meaning that the government does not have the authority allowed to screen social media. Once they receive that power, they will not relinquish it.

With all being said, some people may wonder if potential employees might feel discouraged from applying for jobs because of social media screening. They might also think that sometimes the way you act online does not represent how you act in real life. If potential employees have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear. But if potential employees feel uncomfortable, they could speak privately to a business representative and request an exception. As for the Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde theory, someone who acts irresponsibly in a casual internet scenario can’t act responsibly in a stressful business scenario. The employer should have the decision whether or not to regard internet behavior as a serious offense or goofing off. Therefore, even with psychology taken into account, social media screening should be allowed..

Social media screening protects a private company’s reputation. Protection from social media screening by government protects a citizen’s 4th amendment right. Therefore, social media screening should be allowed in private businesses, and not allowed in government. The 4th amendment clearly states that the government cannot search private property without a warrant, business owners protect their reputation through screening, and the government should not have the power to screen citizens that apply for jobs. It holds utter importance for a business owner to have the ability to protect their business through a variety of methods, including social media. At the same time, the founding father’s wishes should be met and regarded, and the average commoner protected.

• Henderson, Harry. Privacy in the Information Age. Facts On File, 2006. Library in a Book.
  Hillstrom, Laurie Collier. "The Development of Online Social Networks." Online Social Networks, Lucent Books, 2010, pp. 22-35. Technology 360. Student Resources in Context, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/CX2461000011/SUIC?u=west13579&xid=6fd2573c. Accessed 27 Apr. 2017.
• Merino, Noël, editor. Teens and Privacy. Detroit, Greenhaven Press, 2011. Current Controversies. Opposing Viewpoints in Context, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010751224/OVIC?u=west13579&xid=67f01f6e. Accessed 2 May 2017.
• "Pro: Social-media Check Offers Employers Insight into Applicants." Victoria Advocate (Victoria, TX), 6 May 2012. Student Resources in Context, link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A288775444/SUIC?u=west13579&xid=5fce1121. Accessed 2 May 2017.

Thanks for reading this! Please let me know your opinions on this topic! Feedback is always appreciated! Also, remember to check back later.

Also remember to check for: My weekly 7 post, As Well As My Composer Birthday Posts
Make sure to check out my Minecraft server themed on Steem, The Ip: is steemcraft.mcph.co!!