Social Network Status Updates Come Back To Bite You

from the is-nothing-private? dept

Fri, Mar 13th 2009 1:43pm — Carlo Longino

Lots of people wrestle with the question of what in their lives is public or private, particularly as they put more of them online. But it may pay to err on the side of caution, as plenty of instances continue to pop up to remind us that really, very little, if anything is private once it's online. Take the case of a Philadelphia Eagles stadium worker, apparently fired after he called the team "retarded" in a status update, for letting a player sign with another team. Or the New York City cop, whose update that he was watching the movie Training Day -- which features Denzel Washington as a cop who doesn't play by the rules -- in order "to brush up on proper police procedure" helped a suspect beat a gun-possession charge. Part of the issue is that as people get more and more friends online, even stuff they think is private essentially becomes public. That will undoubtedly have an effect on people's online behavior, and could hamper the growth of social networking and online life-sharing.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: public, social network, status

19 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 13 Mar 2009 @ 2:15pm

Thus the reason my twitter and facebook statuses are vague and non-interesting to the rest of the world
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Relonar, 13 Mar 2009 @ 2:27pm

Re:
high five

but yeah, it's the same here, just don't update about sensitive material, and remember that sarcasm is a non-printable character.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Mar 2009 @ 2:33pm

Re: Re:
Facebook update:
John is trying to memorize the number 403-85-3445.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Doc Rings, 13 Mar 2009 @ 2:45pm

It's pretty easy: mean what you say and say what you mean. If you can't live honestly, then maybe you should refrain. People need to get away from leading double lives...

If you have ideas that make you a bad cop, then be honest and don't be a cop.

If you think something is retarded and you want to talk about it online, then at least have the cajones to take the punishment...

If you mean something sarcastic, that's what emoticons are for! ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Joel Coehoorn, 13 Mar 2009 @ 2:48pm

Bad Subpeona
In the case of the cop's update, IIRC it was made public as the result of a subpoena that should not have been granted, not because the info was ever really 'public'.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Medbob, 13 Mar 2009 @ 3:40pm

It's just another data point
The real point here is that this is another place where truth can leak out. If you've got a real bad attitude in your "professional" life, (and I use that term loosely here) it may show. Certainly if you cannot identify the problem as it moves from your mind to the keyboard, then it's systemic, and you need a reboot or an enema!
It takes a bit of common sense, something that is becoming increasingly less common.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Interesting, 13 Mar 2009 @ 3:55pm

Trial in Arkansas
A company wants to appeal a verdict because one of the jurors was twittering.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Buzz, 13 Mar 2009 @ 4:10pm

Wait
Why are these people adding important officials to their friend lists? I don't add my employers and whatnot. That's just silly. I keep my personal life... PERSONAL...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 13 Mar 2009 @ 4:13pm

Well, no shit. Jeez people are stupid.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 13 Mar 2009 @ 4:56pm

facebook should be illegal
i set my status to "boffing my secretary, susan" and my wife left me and is suing me for alimony and custody of the kids, susan's husband left her and is suing her for divorce, susan left me and is suing me for defamation, and is also suing the company for sexual harrassment, and the company has fired me for no good damn reason.

facebook is a freakin menace and should be burned to the ground.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 13 Mar 2009 @ 10:11pm

I don't even have a "social networking" page. I never saw the need to put aspects of my life up on a public page and then add "friends". The only reason I even created a YouTube account was so that I could bypass the age restriction on some videos. I keep getting offers to be put on friends lists from other users and I just ignore them. My profile is empty.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Buzz, 13 Mar 2009 @ 10:31pm

What?
@Rekrul - It's not public. Your information is protected and only viewable by those you permit. From there, it's only a matter of exercising discipline and only adding people you know in real life instead of 5000 "friends" on the Internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Gene Cavanaugh, 14 Mar 2009 @ 2:07pm

Social networks
Right on, Michael, though I will add that having a cop say he watches something like that to learn "proper police procedure" means catching a cop that needs to be fired before he does some real damage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
brokeastunes, 16 Mar 2009 @ 6:56am

"Privacy"
Here in Canada a judge recently ruled, in an insurance case, that a person's Facebook info/status could be used as evidence against them. As you can imagine, it was someone who was claiming diminished enjoyment of life, while their updates said the opposite...not too bright.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
nasch, 16 Mar 2009 @ 9:44am

Re:
So was your whole post sarcastic, then? No sarcasm tags or emoticons here, because I'm hoping it was.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Talpas (profile), 18 Mar 2009 @ 11:13am

Is that necessarily bad?
"That will undoubtedly have an effect on people's online behavior, and could hamper the growth of social networking and online life-sharing."

I am not sure this is necessarily bad. It isn't good, but it isn't bad, either. It is simply a fact of sharing your life online. If people realize that sharing their entire life online is going to take away their privacy, and they value their privacy, they are going to stop sharing their entire life online. It is a choice that people just haven't been thinking about till now. Hopefully, this will lead to more thoughtful business models for social sites in the future.

I don't know what those might be (I'm not in the business) but I am sure more intelligent people then I will figure it out.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Talpas (profile), 18 Mar 2009 @ 11:16am

Re: Trial in Arkansas
Well, this is a clear violation of the law. Jurors are not allowed to discuss trial with anyone but the judge, the prosecutors, or other jurors. Sending out twitter messages during the trial is illegal and should call for an appeal and possibly a mistrial.

I said possibly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Talpas (profile), 18 Mar 2009 @ 11:20am

Re: facebook should be illegal
Well, if you weren't boffing susan, then she can sue you for defamation. However, if you were boffing her, I don't see how the suit could stick, as you were simply telling the truth, and you didn't mention anything concerning her character.

As to her suing the company, we don't know the details. Were you the only businessman boffing her? Was she threatened by you or others if she didn't boff you? Etc.

And yes, I know you were being sarcastic. I just thought it would be amusing to respond as though you were being truthful.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Talpas (profile), 18 Mar 2009 @ 11:23am

Re: Re: Trial in Arkansas
Ack! I forgot the defender. Sorry, what I really meant, was the lawyers in the case, both for the defense and prosecution. Though, really, they can't discuss it with them, they can only listen as the lawyers try to explain what happened and why they should think one thing or the other.
[ link to this | view in thread ]