Posted on July 25, 2011

Social Media History Becomes a New Job Hurdle

Jennifer Preston, New York Times, July 20, 2011

{snip} Now, some companies are requiring job candidates to also pass a social media background check.

A year-old start-up, Social Intelligence, scrapes the Internet for everything prospective employees may have said or done online in the past seven years.

Then it assembles a dossier with examples of professional honors and charitable work, along with negative information that meets specific criteria: online evidence of racist remarks; references to drugs; sexually explicit photos, text messages or videos; flagrant displays of weapons or bombs and clearly identifiable violent activity.


30 responses to “Social Media History Becomes a New Job Hurdle”

  1. Anonymous says:

    Soon every white prospective employee will be subjected to ideological testing by self-appointed commissars.

  2. Anonymous says:

    From the original article:

    “All we assemble is what is publicly available on the Internet today.”

    Sure – through their own politically correct filter.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Wonder where they et their funding? Tides, Woods, Ford Foundations? ACLU/SPLC/ADL/NOW ?

    It is not enough to discriminate against Whites simply because we are White. Now they discriminate against us if we agree with anti White discrimination.

  4. kENT says:

    The smartest thing you can do is tell them you are a light skinned black or you are Hispanic, then you can spit out as much racial hatred as you want to and it will be called RACIAL PRIDE?

  5. CDE says:

    If that’s the case then they’ll only be able to hire Mormons.

  6. Anonymous says:

    Well, that would leave me to remain unemployable. Can I get SSA disability for my “racism” and racist remarks on forums such as Amren? What kind of country have we become where employers are allowed to determine if we are racists or not(shouldn’t we be to begin with?) and to further delve into our personal life? We know this will only apply to WHITES.

  7. Question Diversity says:


    1. Don’t use Facebook, or any social media service that wants your real name or whose functionality rewards your using your real name. As an aside, Facebook might have altered the Utoya Island shooter’s profile after the fact. Mark Zuckerberg is an Obama flunky and an unhinged lib (gave $100m to the Newark Junior Prison System), so I can easily see a DHS bureaucrat giving ole Zuck a call.

    Twitter does not require your real name. My own Twitter account (@countenanceblog) is obviously not my real name, and I studiously avoid using my real name while Tweeting.

    2. Don’t do personal computing business, either social media or otherwise, on company time or on company computers. Obviously not company computers, because of central IT logs. And not on company time either, because you never know who is looking over your shoulder while you check Twitter on your phone.

  8. Anonymous says:

    Don’t expect people of all races to be held to the same standard of thought crime as whites will be. Things like this aren’t designed to discover “racism” in non-whites.

    And you can guarantee that simply posting on a site like this will be grounds for dismissal, regardless of content. You must be “raciss” just being here.

  9. sbuffalonative says:

    In a couple years, we’re going to be reading about social network job searches being deemed unfair to and disproportionately affecting minorities.

  10. A Comment from Australia says:

    Some months ago while I was browsing Amren and some similar minded web sites the following message came up on my screen: “You are a white male, over 40, a racist but not a Nazi” This is all quite correct and I am certainly not a Nazi! I just wonder who is monitoring our internet use. Perhaps the PC thought police and your DHS???

    I was quite young when I read “1984” and at the time thought how impossible it would be to have George Orwells 2-way telescreens with “Big Brother” watching our every move. Now I am not so sure and with security cameras everywhere I may even begin to believe that we do have thought police” out there somewhere!

    AND, My IT provider assures me that governments would dearly love to be able to censor the internet, he then added with a bit of a chuckle “but we’re still too clever for them so far!”.

  11. Paul Jones says:

    One of the legal phrases I recall when a person’s First Amendment rights are violated is “a chilling effect on free speech.” This appears to be a very insidious, but effective, way to do just that and it could be hard for a person who made one or two politically incorrect remarks over seven years to get the courts to look into how this new “service” for employers could have impacted his or her Constitutonal rights if a job was not

    offered due to supposed “hateful” remarks.

  12. Anonymous says:

    Anyone who goes on to a “social media” site and gives away any personal information is a fool. Best never to join or if you are a member, quit. A generation ago the Fascists asked “were any of your grandparents Jewish”; now they’re finding out if you have any incorrect thoughts about blacks. Beware, be very aware.

  13. Robert Binion says:

    Should I rescind my registration at “Bed Bath & Beyond”? If you think about it, the access to officials of government given selected media outlets is a form of payola. Under this kind of scrutiny, the opportunity for blackmail of recalcitrant reporters would be enormous. This is a gag order on internet users.

  14. Bill R says:

    These are all public forums. If you do the things described in public forums, you have no expectation of privacy. If the hiring company want’s to data mine about you, nothing you can do. UNLESS they get your name wrong or mistake you for somebody else, or some illegal or other person has stolen your ID. Then you’ve got a mess on your hands. It should not be illegal to glean public forums for information. I would add, however, that a law should be passed that if companies DO that sort of thing, they have to include the dossier (the full mined dossier) with the denial for hire letter. If they mined, rejected, and do not include full disclosure, then they are liable under civil law. If they HACKED to get the information, then they are liable under criminal law.

    Here’s the irony and idiocy though…..blacks are pushing for expunging black criminal records so they can be hired. Blacks are hired regardless of criminal records or affiliation with extremist groups. Yet, if you said something nasty about the most problem ridden segment of our society, you will not be hired. When will it end?

  15. Michigan Patriot says:

    We know what ” group ” that this aimed at; the one without constitutional rights since Brown vs Bd. of Ed.. If this standard is applied equally and fairly, which it won’t be,; people of color would be eliminated first and foremost while all the anti-White Christian groups that they belong to, such as : minority scholorship only funds that only they can apply for: naacp, laRaza, Asian special interest groups,Ameri-indian groups,adl; etc.

  16. Old White Jim says:

    A lot of employers still see a racist background as a plus. You can believe me on this because I’m always right and I never lie.

  17. Madison Grant says:

    George Orwell, call your office!

  18. Anonymous says:

    It’s always been out there , but now it is out there more than ever . I just checked , stuff from years ago . It wasn’t that way just a few weeks ago . The first amendment has been abolished . We truly live in some very dangerous times .

  19. Tim in Indiana says:

    Then it assembles … negative information that meets specific criteria: online evidence of racist remarks

    Since the liberals think all Republicans are racist (at least of the closet variety), all they need to do is check the political affiliation of job applicants and ban all conservatives from employment. That’s the world we’re headed towards anyway.

    This is basically just banning people for a political belief.

  20. John Engelman says:

    This will be more of a problem in some industries than others. Employers in the private sector are likely to be Republicans who have had difficulties with affirmative action guidelines.

  21. AlmostMusicPhD says:

    This is nothing less than ‘thought crimes.’ As the poet once said, ‘Die Gedanken sind frei!” And from that (Mahler’s Des Knaben Wunderhorn) we went to Hitler’s brownshirts, and Trotsky’s Cheka…

    And now we have it in the USA? It’s time to abolish this whole infrastructure. As an academic, I find this abhorrent. The liberals and sodomites, non-Europeans and minorities, ALL GET A ‘PASS’ – on hiring, on being able to articulate (at taxpayer expense!) THEIR p.o.v. (La Raza, GBLT ‘groups’ on campus) but a white European Awareness group is villified before it’s application for ‘club’ on campus even gets to the Dean’s desk!

    This is Bolshevism, and must be destroyed.

  22. Tom in Illinois says:

    If I were a company, i’d be more afraid of hiring the person who shouts racism, rather than one who is racist and keeps to himself about it.

  23. Anonymous says:

    NEVER use your real name on ANYTHING connected to the internet, and never buy anything online. There’s a reason I post here anonymously. I DO have a Facebook account (connected to a dedicated email address used for nothing else, with no identifying information) but it is used exclusively for games when I have the time to unwind. I see others post everything from their real names and addresses with pictures of themselves and family members, (including their children), to what they are eating for breakfast to when they are going to bed and with whom!

  24. The Bobster says:

    Soon every white prospective employee will be subjected to ideological testing by self-appointed commissars.


    It’s already happening in the UK.

    Totalitarian Britain: Schools given more powers to fire British National Party members

    Mon, 18/07/2011

    by Stephen Palmer

    LibLabCon Britain has taken another step closer to totalitarianism with the announcement that schools will be given more powers to fire teachers for simply being members of the British National Party.

    The new rules are the result of plans introduced by education secretary Michael Gove, who last year stated that British National Party membership is not ‘compatible with being a teacher’.

    Although instigated by the Department of Education supposedly to prevent teachers from undermining what it terms ‘fundamental British values’, the rules are more reminiscent of those introduced in 1930s Nazi Germany, when laws were passed to sack Jews and anyone disloyal to Nazism from teaching.

    In its press notice, the Department defines such ‘British values’ as ‘democracy, the rule of law, individual liberty and mutual respect, and tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs’.

    Unsurprisingly, however, it seems that this ‘tolerance of those with different faiths and beliefs’ does not extend to members of the government’s only political opposition.

    The powers will be given to headteachers from September 2012.

    Members of the British National Party are already barred from working as police or prison officers.

  25. Baron says:

    It’s 2011, but it’s looking an awful lot like 1984.

  26. Michael C. Scott says:

    Since I post under my own name here, I’m doubtless on someone’s “bad guy” list, but since I’m also an ex-con, I already have a bigger hurdle to emplyment, 79 US & foreign patents notwithstanding. This kind of screening is overrated by its fans, simply because there is such a huge quantity of information available online. How anyone separate out what is important? A search using key words would help, but those key words would correspond approximately 100% to the words the AmRen editor doesn’t allow.

    On the other hand, shortly before my 31st birthday, after six years of working for jerks, my blood pressure tested at 175/105. Today at age 45, it’s 85/48.

    I think I’ll stick with self-employment. It seems to agree with me.

  27. Marc B says:

    This is nothing but an excuse to get super-picky in a tight job market with an excessive amount of candidates chasing a finite number of decent paying jobs. It’s overarching agenda is to create a chilling effect on one of the last few places where open discourse exists while also limiting the financial mobility of of people espousing the wrong sorts of opinions.

  28. STARR says:

    1984, here we come. The “Thought Police” have arrived.

  29. fred says:

    One can’t really oppose the collection of information freely posted to an open forum. But I would oppose the purchase of such information from a internet service provider without express written consent. Overall, I’m not too worried about it. I take steps to protect my privacy. But I haven’t said anything online that I wouldn’t own in public.

  30. John Doberman says:

    Some internet tips for those who are a little less savvy about the information superhighway.

    As posters above mentioned, do not use your real name, or other information. Also, take into account the fact that websites often use cookies to trace your activities (delete cookies frequently, or better yet, don’t allow them in the first place; some browsers allow “private browsing” as well, which saves no traces on your computer (though the Internet provider still can follow you)). Many websites, will also keep track of which site you just came from, and where you went next.

    Also, you should not stay logged into your accounts like facebook, gmail, etc while you go about your surfing/posting elsewhere. This positively links you with your later online activities which these companies track.

    I usually use “private browsing”, and just delete all history, including cookies, and close and reopen the browser before and after going to sites that are not politically correct. It wastes about 30 sec or so, each time, but worth it to keep some liberal thoughtpoliceman from trying to ruin your career over reading and discussing thoughtcrimes. Needless to say, I never do it at work or any other place where it could be a problem. In fact, if it is an option, best to do it places like the library where it is not your computer, unless you have to provide them your information to sign up to use the computer.

    Its best to assume that potentially tracking is going on, even if you don’t know it for certain, to play it safe. Assume that your information is being tracked. And assume that, even if the website is committed to privacy, that it potentially could be hacked by lib activists, or that a group like Obama’s DOJ is keeping tabs.