If you're seeking gainful employment, go off facebook... NOW!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Beyond Middle Earth
Posts
Blog Archive
-
▼
2009
(37)
-
▼
July
(27)
- The Real Twitpocalypse: Asteroid Alerts Come to Tw...
- Five jobs for Facebook addicts - CNN.com
- Prompt 4
- Does Facebook Replace Face Time or Enhance It? - TIME
- This is innovative but personally, quite tedious!
- Yikes!
- Still trying to get my head around this...
- BBC NEWS | Americas | Facebook 'breaches Canadian ...
- BBC NEWS | Technology | Tech 'has changed foreign ...
- Yahoo launching front page open to others' content...
- Prompt 3
- Prompt 2
- Twitter Treasure Hunts
- Twitter hack raises questions about 'cloud computi...
- Google vs. Microsoft: What you need to know - CNN.com
- Twitter + Diigo
- Time to get caught up!
- Google Chrome...
- Is it really worth the effort?
- Now posting from...
- Web 2.0 and cybersecurity
- Do you digg the Governator?
- What is Web 3.0?
- Oops...
- Prompt 1
- Ubiquity
- The darker side of Web 2.0?
-
▼
July
(27)
5 comments:
AJ,
That's something I've thought about before and even more so since I'm in the process of getting clearance for the Dept of Defense.
Sometimes people need to be aware that anyone can access your information if it's out there in the real world.
-Yvonne
Indeed.
The "gainful employment" bit was a bit of a crack but for sensitive jobs, this really is a concern.
However, it also makes me a little uncomfortable at how public the media actually makes, the life of a public servant...
You'd think they'd restrain themselves a little...
Shirky did say that the editors bottle necked which news would get covered... I wish they'd do it actively to suppress such things.
Then again... this IS facebook - which is Web 2.0 and just out there... so my wishing for media reticence is moot...
I actually use my FB account for my current job. Anything that you put out there can be used by your political enemies, and you don't have to be the head of British secret service to have political enemies. Corporate life can be cut-throat too.
The only rule I go by is the mama rule: if my mama would give me a hard time if she read it, I don't post it. :)
Yeah... that's a pretty good rule of thumb. It's also very intuitive.
It's more amazing how few people actually use it :P
It's an interesting tale. On the one hand, the public is so hungry these days for details of people's personal lives. But then we try to persecute them for having personal lives. That just plain sucks (IMHO). I mean, who cares if the dude wears a speedo? I don't, as long as I don't have to look at him in it. (An aside, I just spent a week at a villa complex in Portugal where there was a portly middle-aged man who walked around the pool in a speedo while reading a book all. day. long. Ugh. And now that I've planted that lovely visual in your head ...)
I've long tended toward blending parts of my worlds, but can be very private about some things. I would share my vacation photos, but carefully. Some things I took photos of because I found them so funny need not be shared with a wide audience (my twisted sense of humor is something I keep more to myself).
There also is the question of where we draw the line to determine what elements of one's personal life are relevant when considering their professional competence. I think the whole Sanford fiasco is a good example of one of these cases right now. Does a personal indiscretion that hurts family members speak to one's suitability as a governor? Contrast that with, say, Britney Spears. Does her mothering ability and partying lifestyle have anything to do with her music? And then, also, put them both in perspective. If Sanford's poor judgment carries over to his job, how severe is the impact on others? What about Spears?
I realize I'm deviating a bit from the original point here, but then again it all ties back to the issue of finding info on someone's personal life on the web and how it impacts their ability to perform their job.
Post a Comment