Recruitment Asia Pacific

Aaron Dodd

Social Media and Background Checks - Yes or No?

There have been some feisty twitter debates raging today around the ethics, legality and morality of the use of social media to conduct background checks on candidates. The debate is quite polarised.

The “anti camp” is claiming that using social media in this way is an invasion of privacy. They claim that recruitment selection decisions should only be based on professional criteria and to exclude someone from a position because of something they said on twitter or the football club they follow is fraught with legal issues. Some say that looking at a candidate’s Facebook page (if you somehow have access to it of course) is akin to snooping.

My stance on this debate is that once someone has published something about themselves, their personal views, activities etc then it is a matter of public record. If they don’t wish it to be public then they shouldn’t post it or they should set their sites’ security settings so that only those they wish to see it can see it. Once it’s public it’s public and when it’s on the web, it’s there forever. Of course it’s up to the reader to further test the veracity of the content being looked at. Just because it’s on the web doesn’t make it true!

If it is on the public record therefore, surely it’s information that can and often will be perused to gain further insight into a potential candidate. Often this information can support their application. It can also have an adverse effect. As it is on the public record, I don’t consider it “snooping”. If one was to hack private Facebook pages etc then yes…clearly that would be snooping, and illegal. If I look up someone’s home address in the white pages, is that “snooping”?

I know that many of our clients are regularly Googling potential candidates. To think this is going to “not happen” is naïve at best. Mindset as a company has also been asked by some clients to perform Social Media audits on potential candidates. All these are are lists of publicly available searched information. Sometimes the result of the audit is “nothing exists”. When this has happened, the lack of information has certainly not hindered (or supported) the candidate.

Many commercially available applicant tracking systems now also routinely spider social media sites to give users summary pages of a candidate’s social media profile. Clearly the use of social media as another tool for selection decisions is here to stay.

Marketers have been keeping records of what individuals search for and purchase for years. Often what they know about us commercially and personally pales into insignificance compared to what can be found by Google. This information is often traded and sold. I’ve seen little comments on the ethics or privacy concerns regarding this.

If candidates are concerned that their social media profile could compromise them in their job searches they should set their sites’ security settings appropriately. Another tip is to use a “clean” email address for their applications, i.e. one that isn’t linked to any of the social media sites (except perhaps LinkedIn). That way it’s harder for the ‘bots to find it.

The reality is that the information, accurate or not, is out there on the web now. It’s volume will only increase as more is added over time. To think it won’t be used by potential employers is naïve at best.

Add a Comment

You need to be a member of Recruitment Asia Pacific to add comments!

Join Recruitment Asia Pacific

Ross Clennett Comment by Ross Clennett on March 19, 2010 at 3:48pm
The critical thing for all recruiters to keep in mind when reviewing publicly available information about a candidate (whether on the Internet or elsewhere) is 'what relevance does this information have with respect to the candidate's competency and motivation to undertake the job I am considering him or her for?'

Drawing assumptions or jumping to unsubstantiated conclusions about the connection between Internet info and work performance is the mark of a recruiter with very low skills and an even poorer ethical compass.

Aaron says; testing the veracity of information is very important. I agree and would go further and say you should only do that when it is clear the information poses a legimate question about the candidate's competency or motivation to perform the job or succeed in the organisation's culture. Anything else is stooping to a supermarket tabloid level and not worthy of any person calling themselves a professional recruiter.

Oh, and another thing. When you are gathering information about a candidate via the Internet I would suggest that your activities be fully recorded so as to comply with the Privacy Act. A candidate has the right to request access to any information, with minor exceptions, that you hold on them so I recommend that you are 100% comfortable and ready to explain your 'SM candidate audit' to the candidate if and when required.

About

Paul Jacobs Paul Jacobs created this Ning Network.

Blog Posts

Dan Nuroo

Passion..... Got to love it.

Posted by Dan Nuroo on September 3, 2010 at 2:51am

Justin Hillier

Social Media Inception

Posted by Justin Hillier on August 10, 2010 at 1:03am

Dan Nuroo

Working without the ball

Posted by Dan Nuroo on July 29, 2010 at 3:48pm

Justin Hillier

The Ultimate Job is now launched

Posted by Justin Hillier on July 14, 2010 at 4:30pm

Dan Nuroo

Office politics, a brief survival guide

Posted by Dan Nuroo on July 12, 2010 at 1:57pm

Greg Savage

Recruiters please, shut up and listen!

Posted by Greg Savage on June 24, 2010 at 1:43am

© 2010   Created by Paul Jacobs

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service

Sign in to chat!