Social Media firms are now increasing their presence in the Middle East. The companies hope to capitalize on the recent popularity of social media in the region. They are asserting their presence via digital advertising. Digital advertising has traditionally not been used in the Middle East. According to The New York Times, print advertising, and television advertising, have been the main methods of advertising. It will interesting to follow whether digital advertising will take off in the Middle East. Click on this link to read The New York Times article about the topic.
Category: Social Media Platforms
More States Consider Social Media Privacy Bills
The concept of legislatively limiting employer access to employee social media traffic is gaining traction. Legislators in Georgia, Montana and North Dakota are considering bills similar to the one already adopted by the Illinois legislature. The bills would restrict employers from researching social media sights as a means of gaining additional insights about employees and/or employee candidates. More information about the potential laws is available here.
Are these bills innovative or are they just a natural extension of the HR workplace rules that prohibit, say, asking a candidate is she is pregnant?
Taking a Break From Facebook
A recent survey by the Pew Research Center found that 61 percent of current Facebook users admitted to taking voluntary breaks from the site. Reasons for a hiatus from the most popular social network in America include: a decrease in interest in the site; not having enough time to dedicate to updating and polishing their profiles; and the general idea that Facebook is simply a waste of time. In addition, 4 percent of the surveyors cited that privacy and security concerns contributed to their departure. Privacy concerns related to social media remain an evolving area of law, and it will be interesting to see if more Facebook users begin to delete their accounts due to this concern. It should be noted that of those 4 percent, “those users eventually resumed their regular activity, another 20 percent of Facebook users admitted to deleting their accounts.” To read more, go to the link below:
The Modern Way to Get Back at Your Cheating Spouse
So, many of you may have now heard about AshleyMadison.com whose tagline is “Life is Short, Have an Affair”(I would put a link, but, I’m pretty sure if you really want to go to that site, you don’t need my direction). It’s a website which explicitly exists as a match-making site for those interested in interactions in which at least one of the parties is already in a committed relationship with someone else. What you may not have heard of yet is Cheaterville.com (tagline: Don’t Be The Last to Know), in which wronged parties can post details about ex-paramours, for the purported purpose of “warning” others.
Would a suit for Libel stand against a poster on Cheaterville.com (Well, we know the answer if the allegation is true, but what if it’s not?) – Does it matter whether the individual who has been posted about is male or female (in terms of showing actual damage)? We’ve heard from social science and media over and over that while promiscuous behavior in men makes them “players” (at least a potentially positive attribute), women are more often dubbed “sluts.” Are women more hurt by such accusations online?
“Slut-shaming” is a whole different subject which I promise to post about some time soon – but in the meantime, I’ll be mulling over whether men or women are more hurt by sites like Cheaterville.com, and whether they might serve a legitimate purpose.
Doctors and Judges: Who Can They Friend On Facebook?
Some doctors use social media to discuss health topics, while other doctors use their Facebook or twitters as a tool to become more available to their patients. Doctors who accept friend requests from patients may face concerns such as protecting patient privacy and maintaining appropriate boundaries between professional and social relationships. At first glance, one may believe that there is no harm in doctors and patients being Facebook friends, however, as the article notes, this could violate HIPPA laws.
Judges face similar challenges when they choose to accept friend requests from prosecutors or defense lawyers who appear before them. In Florida, the court may soon clarify the parameters that judges and lawyers must abide by in regards to social media interaction. A Broward criminal case could set the stage for state law that will dictate who a judge can “friend” on Facebook. This case arose after a defense attorney filed a motion to disqualify a judge because he was friends on Facebook with the assistant state attorney.
Would you feel comfortable friend requesting your doctor?
NY 2nd Dept. finds statute of limiations didn’t toll in suit against anonymous blogger
This case comes courtesy of some of the folks up in the Town of Wayawaynda in Upstate New York. The controversy plays out like an oscar worthy movie. Seems as if someone beheaded a horse and then left the head in a Wayawanda Town Board member’s swimming pool. The incident sparked accusatory anonymous blogs, posted in turn by wayguy, johnny500 and wawayandafirst. The posts occured on or about August 29, 2007 and October 6, 2007 and accused plaintiff of pulling off the “Tom Hagan.” (although, like the plaintiff in this case, no one is sure that Don Corleone’s adopted son actually committed the heinous act).
Plaintiff filed suit on July 28, 2008 against Mike Hawkins, knowns as “wayguy” and two other bloggers, John Doe johnny500 (johnny500) and John Doe wawayandafirst (Wawayandafirst). Defendant Wayne Skinner was not identified by name in the original complaint, but on September 18, 2008, Plaintiff served Skinner with copies of the original summons and complaint assuming Skinner was John Doe johhny500 and wawayandafirst. Three months later, on October 20, the complaint was amended, to include Wayne Skinner (and his wife.)
Skinner argued that the case should be dismissed since the statute of limitations ran prior to the October 20th filing. (the statute of limitations had not run out prior to July 28). But, here is the twist, turns out that although skinner was not johnny500 he was “wawayandfirst” and the court found that since “the remaining John Doe named by the original complaint — “John Doe wawayandafirst’ (Wawayandafirst’)” — referred to Wayne Skinner, and since he was alleged in the complaint to be the individual responsible for issuing the Wawayandafirst blog posts. Under these circumstances, the original complaint was sufficient to have apprised Wayne Skinner that he was one of the intended defendants.”
I’m not sure whether the actual claim will stick, but I am certainly glad to see the court craft its opinion to hold an “originally anonymous” blogger responsible.
What does it take to make a blog review defamation?
Calling someone a “real tool” is not enough to defame a doctor’s reputation. The Minnesota Supreme Court recently ruled in the case, McKee v. Laurion, that a web review, written by Dennis Laurion the son of a one of Dr. David McKee’s patients, which stated, among other things, “Dr MCKee is a real tool,” was an opinion rather than fact, and therefore not actionable.
Ironically, Dr. McKee, like so many doctors, presumably brought the action to defend his reputation, which was originally tarnished by those reading, and believing, the website on which the rating appeared. Ironically, because of the McKee’s suit, Laurion’s words have gone viral. What a bummer for Dr. McKee, not only did he lose his suit, but he potentially lost a wider patient base too!
Did Netflix Violate SEC Regulations on Facebook?
Netflix CEO Reed Hastings was very excited when his company reached a milestone, achieving one billion hours of content on their streaming service. Hastings was so excited, that he posted the information on his personal Facebook page. However, the SEC requires that disclosures about company information must be distributed “through a press release on a widely disseminated news or wire service, or by ‘any other non-exclusionary method’ that provides broad public access.”
With Facebook having over one billion active monthly users and considering the top newspaper only circulates approximately 62,000,000 copies monthly, has Facebook become the more appropriate venue for companies to release information?
Government seems to be taking bigger steps toward regulating social media
Privacy is finally catching the real attention of the Government. In a moved aimed at keeping our social media traffic private, the FTC is urging social media companies to include a do-not-track feature in their software and apps. A NYTimes article, which is available at http://tinyurl.com/algljc8 discusses the very real concern’s of government officials and highlights a recent FTC fine of $800,000 issued against the neophyte social networking app, Path for violating federal regulations against collecting personal information on underaged users. While the move seems like a good one, it also smacks of a little too much government regulation, even for this seemingly staunch anti-libertarian.
Waitress at Applebee’s Fired for Posting Receipt on Social Media Site
A server at Applebee’s received a receipt from a customer (a Pastor, apparently) which left her no tip for a party of 20 people, and read “I give God 10%, why do you get 18?” Another waitress, trying to make the scene into something more lighthearted, posted a picture of the receipt on her Facebook page. She left the signature visible. Once the identity of the diner was being guessed online, the story spread, and the waitress who posted the photo was fired.
I post this, partly to follow up on my recent post about Federal Regulations prohibiting employer’s from blanket bans on employee social media postings. If the waitress had posted the photo without the signature line visible, would she still have her job? Would she also have had to exclude the name/address of the restaurant?