Employers

[Shadow Conception]

So nowadays, apparently employers perform online background searches before hiring.

My dad is insisting they have the capability to get past privacy filters at will that the user has the option to turn on. Can they really?

 

[Clair de Lune]

I highly fucking doubt it.

Let's use our brain shall we?

A private biz (your company) has some sort of an authority over another private biz (Facebook) to invade and infringe upon other people's privacy?

If miraculously so, at what point can your company do this? What if I start a biz of my own- can I start telling Facebook to give me access? At what point am I granted such power?

Your dad is fail.

 

[guyver01]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
My dad is insisting they have the capability to get past privacy filters at will

so.. lesse...

you're applying for a job at joeblow's house of pancakes.

their HR department has developed the technology to crack privacy filters used at another, independent company.


riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

 

[Shadow Conception]

He's using credit checks to justify this. He's saying that employers have access to your credit history (with consent on the application) whereas normal civilians cannot access that information.

 

[RESmonkey]

No. Not if it's private.

 

[Clair de Lune]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
He's using credit checks to justify this. He's saying that employers have access to your credit history (with consent on the application) whereas normal civilians cannot access that information.

Credit check is a public info. Facebook info is privately owned by a single company. See my original questions and answer those. I'll start my own biz so I view everyone's FB.

 

[guyver01]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
He's saying that employers have access to your credit history (with consent on the application) whereas normal civilians cannot access that information.

Depending on the company, yes... they use a background research company that gets paid ALOT of money to provide specific information.

i seriously doubt they do that for EVERY position tho..

if you're working as a pc repair tech.. what would it matter about your credit history?

however if you're working in the accounting department at a major company... they're gonna worry if you have declared bankruptcy 4 times.

this information is ALSO in the documentation you sign when you agree to a background check. they can't access your info without your consent.

 

[Shadow Conception]

He heard on CBS News that apparently 35% of recent job applicants were rejected due to bad content found on their Facebooks. He refuses to consider the possibility that maybe this 35% did not have any privacy options set up. Instead, he has cooked up a conspiracy theory. Because Facebook owns everything a user posts there, a company could bribe Facebook for access to any desired profile. Any credibility behind this?

Haha, he refuses to even read this thread I linked to him. Apparently you're all a bunch of idiots and WTOP is the supreme authority, even though it never even mentioned whether this 35% of applicants had their profiles hidden from public view.

 

[guyver01]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
Because Facebook owns everything a user posts there

apparently he's not even up on current events, despite watching the news.

Facebook backed off that "terms of service" modification 2 days after they posted it, due to public outcry.


and if he doesn't believe that .. he can read it online:

Facebook backs off changes to terms of service


Facebook founder and CEO Marc Zuckerberg reverted to the social networking site's old "terms of use" agreement Tuesday night, undoing a legal change that implied the site might own its members' information forever.

 

[masterxfob]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
He heard on CBS News that apparently 35% of recent job applicants were rejected due to bad content found on their Facebooks. He refuses to consider the possibility that maybe this 35% did not have any privacy options set up. Instead, he has cooked up a conspiracy theory. Because Facebook owns everything a user posts there, a company could bribe Facebook for access to any desired profile. Any credibility behind this?

Haha, he refuses to even read this thread I linked to him. Apparently you're all a bunch of idiots and WTOP is the supreme authority, even though it never even mentioned whether this 35% of applicants had their profiles hidden from public view.

you're an asstard...

 

[Clair de Lune]

I wanna punch your dumbass ignorant dad who's so full of shit and into himself that he refuses to view his thread. What is he, afraid of feeling stupid?

 

[guyver01]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
WTOP is the supreme authority

That right there means your dad is a nutcase, and nothing he says should ever be listend to.


WTOP is an all-news formatted broadcast radio station licensed to Washington, D.C., serving Metropolitan Washington, DC area. WTOP is owned by Bonneville Holding Company and operated by Bonneville International Corporation, a broadcasting company wholly owned by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints



LOL... taking "news" from a radio station owned by a religious nutcase group.

yea... no bias there.

 

[Killerme33]

If it is set to private they can't see anything more than anyone else just searching your name (aka profile pic, networks, name).

 

[Clair de Lune]

Originally posted by: Killerme33
If it is set to private they can't see anything more than anyone else just searching your name (aka profile pic, networks, name).

you can even set it so that your name doesn't even show up in search. 0% visibility.

 

[Shadow Conception]

I might've went a bit too far there. He doesn't believe WTOP/CBS is the supreme authority, he just believes that whatever they say is completely infallible because of WHO they are. And because this isn't a political issue (such as Obama/McCain), it won't be riddled with bias. The mindset is that CBS has assisted in taking down presidential campaigns with bias, and it is a source heard by people around the world; so why would it lie (or how would it lie and get away)?

The article in question is here. A short excerpt regarding privacy:

Many employers admit they've even learned how to access profiles students think are "private" ? and they're surprised by how many students don't care if everyone knows everything about them.

What most students don't realize is those party pictures make up their "online footprint" ? one that will follow them well beyond sorority row.

Take Rkein's pictures. They don't show anything lewd or illegal, but ...

"Within a short period of time, you could find these 83 photos on every search engine on the Web, and these 83 photos could be attached to your name for the rest of your career," says DeMello.

So say you have made your Facebook private. All your photo albums and notes and everything have been blocked off from private access (and most people don't care to privatize their albums). These photos will still be crawled by search engines like Google and made available on their image search engine? That seems impossible.

 

[Whisper]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
I might've went a bit too far there. He doesn't believe WTOP/CBS is the supreme authority, he just believes that whatever they say is completely infallible because of WHO they are. And because this isn't a political issue (such as Obama/McCain), it won't be riddled with bias. The mindset is that CBS has assisted in taking down presidential campaigns with bias, and it is a source heard by people around the world; so why would it lie (or how would it lie and get away)?

The article in question is here. A short excerpt regarding privacy:

Many employers admit they've even learned how to access profiles students think are "private" ? and they're surprised by how many students don't care if everyone knows everything about them.

What most students don't realize is those party pictures make up their "online footprint" ? one that will follow them well beyond sorority row.

Take Rkein's pictures. They don't show anything lewd or illegal, but ...

"Within a short period of time, you could find these 83 photos on every search engine on the Web, and these 83 photos could be attached to your name for the rest of your career," says DeMello.

So say you have made your Facebook private. All your photo albums and notes and everything have been blocked off from private access (and most people don't care to privatize their albums). These photos will still be crawled by search engines like Google and made available on their image search engine? That seems impossible.

Depends. Just because you've set your own profile to private doesn't mean that the profiles of all your friends--who can "tag" you in photos they post--are all private as well. Additionally, there's an option in facebook, which by default is set to "on," that allows third-party advertisers access to photos and friends unless you disable it. Or something along those lines.

 

[DrPizza]

Originally posted by: Whisper

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
I might've went a bit too far there. He doesn't believe WTOP/CBS is the supreme authority, he just believes that whatever they say is completely infallible because of WHO they are. And because this isn't a political issue (such as Obama/McCain), it won't be riddled with bias. The mindset is that CBS has assisted in taking down presidential campaigns with bias, and it is a source heard by people around the world; so why would it lie (or how would it lie and get away)?

The article in question is here. A short excerpt regarding privacy:

Many employers admit they've even learned how to access profiles students think are "private" ? and they're surprised by how many students don't care if everyone knows everything about them.

What most students don't realize is those party pictures make up their "online footprint" ? one that will follow them well beyond sorority row.

Take Rkein's pictures. They don't show anything lewd or illegal, but ...

"Within a short period of time, you could find these 83 photos on every search engine on the Web, and these 83 photos could be attached to your name for the rest of your career," says DeMello.

So say you have made your Facebook private. All your photo albums and notes and everything have been blocked off from private access (and most people don't care to privatize their albums). These photos will still be crawled by search engines like Google and made available on their image search engine? That seems impossible.

Depends. Just because you've set your own profile to private doesn't mean that the profiles of all your friends--who can "tag" you in photos they post--are all private as well. Additionally, there's an option in facebook, which by default is set to "on," that allows third-party advertisers access to photos and friends unless you disable it. Or something along those lines.

Bingo! "By accepting this agreement, you're allowing this application to access your profile and pictures and your contacts profile and pictures that it needs to work."

 

[rockyct]

If you've got a facebook friend at the company that's considering you, there's a decent chance they could see something interesting. It'd be more along the line of "oh, you might hire <blank>, I saw some crazy photos of him on facebook last week."

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: Shadow Conception
He's using credit checks to justify this. He's saying that employers have access to your credit history (with consent on the application) whereas normal civilians cannot access that information.

If you consent on a job application to allow a possible employer access to your credit report, then YES yuour dad is right!!