The New York Times has been around since 1851 and is regarded as the newspaper of record for the United States. Its reputation is second to none. In the Social Media Age the Gray Lady is still a premier destination for news.
This past week has proven that real world reputation still trumps Facebook Likes, LinkedIn shares, Tweets, etc... If The New York Times reports on something it matters and the world takes notice. For example, on December 25, 2011, the paper reported on a lawsuit that may provide some guidance regarding who owns a Twitter account and what is the value of Twitter follower. Within 24 hours after the article was published the story went viral and news organizations around the world reported on this matter. I appeared on Canada's CTV News Channel last night to discuss the case.
While some may argue that because of Twitter, LinkedIn, Facebook, etc... the story went viral, I disagree. The story went viral because the New York Times reported on it. The proof may be that it was reported online by a major business publication on November 14, 2011 and again on November 17, 2011. The articles were viewed cumulatively approximately 10,000 times online and shared approximately 1000 times via social media. Despite widespread viewing and social media sharing, this story did not go viral until it was covered by the The New York Times.
Reputation is not something that Klout, PeerIndex, etc....are able to accurately measure. Those who believe these companies can measure reputation remind me of the Emperor in the Hans Christian Anderson tale: The Emperor's New Clothes. The bottom line is that reputation is everything and not easily quantifiable.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
2011 Social Media Law Predictions Update Part I
On January 10, 2011, I made ten predictions for 2011 regarding social media and the law. Now it is time to evaluate my ability to read the tea leaves in social media and the law.
1) Employers will continue to grapple with where to draw the line regarding employee social media use. This prediction has come true. For example, the NLRB has dealt with multiple cases this year concerning social media usage by employees and is trying to balance an employee's First Amendment right versus an employer's ability to discipline.
2) More courts will address social media usage in their instructions to juries and there will be more e-discovery related social media matters. This prediction has come true. For example, California recently banned jurors from using social media to discuss their active cases.
3) The judicial system, bar associations, and bar counsels will work to find a common sense approach regarding how lawyers, judges, and clients may or may not interact with each other on social media. This predication has come true. For example, the San Diego County Bar Association wrote an opinion regarding social media and ethics.
4) Intellectual property law will be updated to better protect copyright owners. This prediction is in the process of coming true. As I am writing this post Congress is debating the Stop Online Piracy Act and several other similar pieces of legislation.
5) The Federal Election Commission and state election boards will update their rules to address social media usage by political candidates. This prediction has come true around the world. For example, Canadians now face strict social media rules prohibiting premature transmission of election results.
Four of my first five predictions have come true and it appears that after the Congressional recess my prediction that copyright owners will soon have more intellectual property protection may also be realized. I will be reviewing my second five predictions soon-so stay tuned.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
1) Employers will continue to grapple with where to draw the line regarding employee social media use. This prediction has come true. For example, the NLRB has dealt with multiple cases this year concerning social media usage by employees and is trying to balance an employee's First Amendment right versus an employer's ability to discipline.
2) More courts will address social media usage in their instructions to juries and there will be more e-discovery related social media matters. This prediction has come true. For example, California recently banned jurors from using social media to discuss their active cases.
3) The judicial system, bar associations, and bar counsels will work to find a common sense approach regarding how lawyers, judges, and clients may or may not interact with each other on social media. This predication has come true. For example, the San Diego County Bar Association wrote an opinion regarding social media and ethics.
4) Intellectual property law will be updated to better protect copyright owners. This prediction is in the process of coming true. As I am writing this post Congress is debating the Stop Online Piracy Act and several other similar pieces of legislation.
5) The Federal Election Commission and state election boards will update their rules to address social media usage by political candidates. This prediction has come true around the world. For example, Canadians now face strict social media rules prohibiting premature transmission of election results.
Four of my first five predictions have come true and it appears that after the Congressional recess my prediction that copyright owners will soon have more intellectual property protection may also be realized. I will be reviewing my second five predictions soon-so stay tuned.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Monday, December 26, 2011
Twitter Account Ownership and The Value Of A Twitter Follower
The New York Times recently covered a lawsuit regarding the ownership of a Twitter account and the value of a Twitter follower. These issues may not be novel in the social media space; however, they may be novel issues in a court of law.
The lawsuit is between PhoneDog and Noah Kravitz. Some of the facts appear to be in dispute. However, it appears that Noah Kravitz was tweeting on behalf of PhoneDog, amassed a significant number of Twitter followers, and is no longer associated with PhoneDog. Now PhoneDog wants to be compensated for lost Twitter followers.
I don't want to speculate on the actual ownership of the Twitter account because not all of the facts have been publicly aired. However, PhoneDog is claiming that each Twitter follower is worth $2.50 and according to Forbes PhoneDog is also claiming that Kravitz's twitter account is worth $42,500 per month.
PhoneDog's Twitter follower valuation claim and damage assessment is clearly erroneous and not supported by any facts. As George Orwell might say, some Twitter followers are more equal than others. For example, in August one of my posts was retweeted by someone who has a large number of Twitter followers and within an hour I received more than 100 retweets. Receiving retweets may increase interest in my blog; however, I didn't obtain any new clients who stated on their client intake form that I saw a tweet about my blog post, read my blog post because of the tweet, and then hired my law firm based on a tweet and/or my blog post.
Furthermore, Social Media Credential Fraud may distort the valuation of a Twitter follower. There are some self described social media strategists who are intentionally following tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or maybe millions of Twitter accounts in the hopes of getting a follow back and then misleading their clients into believing they have a large number of followers without the need to follow a large number of people in return.
The bottom line is that until the FTC cracks down on fraud in social media it may not be feasible to accurately value a Twitter follower.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
The lawsuit is between PhoneDog and Noah Kravitz. Some of the facts appear to be in dispute. However, it appears that Noah Kravitz was tweeting on behalf of PhoneDog, amassed a significant number of Twitter followers, and is no longer associated with PhoneDog. Now PhoneDog wants to be compensated for lost Twitter followers.
I don't want to speculate on the actual ownership of the Twitter account because not all of the facts have been publicly aired. However, PhoneDog is claiming that each Twitter follower is worth $2.50 and according to Forbes PhoneDog is also claiming that Kravitz's twitter account is worth $42,500 per month.
PhoneDog's Twitter follower valuation claim and damage assessment is clearly erroneous and not supported by any facts. As George Orwell might say, some Twitter followers are more equal than others. For example, in August one of my posts was retweeted by someone who has a large number of Twitter followers and within an hour I received more than 100 retweets. Receiving retweets may increase interest in my blog; however, I didn't obtain any new clients who stated on their client intake form that I saw a tweet about my blog post, read my blog post because of the tweet, and then hired my law firm based on a tweet and/or my blog post.
Furthermore, Social Media Credential Fraud may distort the valuation of a Twitter follower. There are some self described social media strategists who are intentionally following tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or maybe millions of Twitter accounts in the hopes of getting a follow back and then misleading their clients into believing they have a large number of followers without the need to follow a large number of people in return.
The bottom line is that until the FTC cracks down on fraud in social media it may not be feasible to accurately value a Twitter follower.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Saturday, December 24, 2011
Will the Russian Winter Turn Into An Arab Spring?
Will the Russian Winter turn into an Arab Spring? In 1991, the world watched as the Soviet Union disappeared after a failed coup to overthrow President Mikhail Gorbachev. During the past month, the world has been wondering if Russia is in the middle of another government upheaval that may change the course of history. It is too soon to determine whether Vladimir Putin and Dimitry Medvedev will continue to hold their country's top two leadership positions; however, I predict that they will not lead as long as they had anticipated.
On February 11, 2011, I discussed some of the underlying reasons why Egypt's President Mubarak was forced from power. I stated: "[i]t was a combination of Mubarak's dictatorial rule, routine police brutality, a suspended constitution, and poor living conditions for the average Egyptian that fueled the revolution. However, social media platforms and technologies such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and texting enabled the Egyptian people to political crowdsource and communicate with each other to discuss their unhappiness with Mubarak's 30 year reign and to coordinate a strategy to try to create change."
Russia has some of the same problems that plagued Egypt. Former President Putin and current President Medvedev are seen as dictators, there is rampant police brutality and political corruption, recent constitutional changes that have benefited Putin and Medvedev, and major economic challenges. These issues plus social media missteps by Medvedev and Putin have fueled anger that may foment change. According to published reports, Medvedev/Putin may have also utilized the Russian secret police to try to block protestors from using social media. This is the same tactic that Egypt's Mubarak tried and it failed miserably.
The international community first noticed that the Russian people may have finally grown weary of Putin's stranglehold over the Russian government in late November during a mixed martial arts fight between Russia's Fedor Emelianenko and America's Jeff "The Snowman" Monson. After the fight Putin stepped into the ring to congratulate the winner and the crowd booed Putin. According to the BBC, the scene was uploaded to YouTube and subsequently viewed more than 2.5 million times.
In Russia, booing Putin during a public event was seen as a major signal that there may be underlying problems with his iron grip on the country. Subsequently, during the recent election there were numerous allegations that Putin's party may have participated in electoral fraud. Widespread anger and protests against Putin are increasing daily and instead of properly addressing the concerns of the Russian people Putin is generally ignoring them and acting as a Czar. Therefore, I would not be surprised if the Russian Winter turns into an Arab Spring.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
On February 11, 2011, I discussed some of the underlying reasons why Egypt's President Mubarak was forced from power. I stated: "[i]t was a combination of Mubarak's dictatorial rule, routine police brutality, a suspended constitution, and poor living conditions for the average Egyptian that fueled the revolution. However, social media platforms and technologies such as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and texting enabled the Egyptian people to political crowdsource and communicate with each other to discuss their unhappiness with Mubarak's 30 year reign and to coordinate a strategy to try to create change."
Russia has some of the same problems that plagued Egypt. Former President Putin and current President Medvedev are seen as dictators, there is rampant police brutality and political corruption, recent constitutional changes that have benefited Putin and Medvedev, and major economic challenges. These issues plus social media missteps by Medvedev and Putin have fueled anger that may foment change. According to published reports, Medvedev/Putin may have also utilized the Russian secret police to try to block protestors from using social media. This is the same tactic that Egypt's Mubarak tried and it failed miserably.
The international community first noticed that the Russian people may have finally grown weary of Putin's stranglehold over the Russian government in late November during a mixed martial arts fight between Russia's Fedor Emelianenko and America's Jeff "The Snowman" Monson. After the fight Putin stepped into the ring to congratulate the winner and the crowd booed Putin. According to the BBC, the scene was uploaded to YouTube and subsequently viewed more than 2.5 million times.
In Russia, booing Putin during a public event was seen as a major signal that there may be underlying problems with his iron grip on the country. Subsequently, during the recent election there were numerous allegations that Putin's party may have participated in electoral fraud. Widespread anger and protests against Putin are increasing daily and instead of properly addressing the concerns of the Russian people Putin is generally ignoring them and acting as a Czar. Therefore, I would not be surprised if the Russian Winter turns into an Arab Spring.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Social Media May Decrease Law Firm Revenues
There still appears to be a major disconnect between lawyers and social media. The Wall Street Journal Law Blog recently asked the question: "2012:The Year Law Firms Ditch Geezer Image and Get Tweeting?" Most of the Wall Street Journal's sources for the post were marketers and not practicing lawyers who actively tweet so I would like to see the Wall Street Journal create a follow up post that asks practicing lawyers if Twitter is an effective marketing tool for lawyers.
I believe that the overwhelming majority of practicing lawyers who actively tweet may state that social media usage does not increase law firm revenues. I have been tweeting from @bradleyshear since June 15, 2009, have tweeted more than 3,200 times, and I have a Twitter grade from Twitter Grader of 94/100. Despite these social media statistics, I have never had a client mention on his intake form that he hired me because of my tweets.
Over the past several months, I have had several people approach me during networking events and conferences to tell me that my blog has helped reduce their need for legal services. When this has occurred I have asked how and the general response has been that for some issues my blog provides enough information that they don't feel they need to spend more money on legal fees. One potential client reiterated the old saying "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free."
Instead of increasing law firm revenues social media usage by lawyers may decrease law firm revenues. The World War II saying, "Loose lips sink ships" may come into play when lawyers tweet and/or blog. Therefore, before you spend your firm's marketing dollars on a social media evangelist who wants to teach your firm how to tweet you may want to peel back the social media onion because you may be surprised with what you may find.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
I believe that the overwhelming majority of practicing lawyers who actively tweet may state that social media usage does not increase law firm revenues. I have been tweeting from @bradleyshear since June 15, 2009, have tweeted more than 3,200 times, and I have a Twitter grade from Twitter Grader of 94/100. Despite these social media statistics, I have never had a client mention on his intake form that he hired me because of my tweets.
Over the past several months, I have had several people approach me during networking events and conferences to tell me that my blog has helped reduce their need for legal services. When this has occurred I have asked how and the general response has been that for some issues my blog provides enough information that they don't feel they need to spend more money on legal fees. One potential client reiterated the old saying "Why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free."
Instead of increasing law firm revenues social media usage by lawyers may decrease law firm revenues. The World War II saying, "Loose lips sink ships" may come into play when lawyers tweet and/or blog. Therefore, before you spend your firm's marketing dollars on a social media evangelist who wants to teach your firm how to tweet you may want to peel back the social media onion because you may be surprised with what you may find.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com/.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, December 13, 2011
Student-Athlete Suspended From NCAA FCS Playoffs For a Re-Tweet
The NCAA does not have an official social media policy for its members. Despite the lack of a social media policy, the NCAA suspended Lehigh University's Ryan Spadola who was the football team's top wide receiver from a playoff game for retweeting an alleged inappropriate message. This suspension may have harmed Lehigh's chances of winning the NCAA Football Championship Subdivision since Lehigh lost the game that Spadola was banned from.
Playing collegiate sports is privilege and not a right. Ryan Spadola apologized for the tweet and appeared contrite over his actions. However, the NCAA still made an example out of him. This teachable moment has turned into a situation that may have major legal ramifications in the future for similar situations. What if instead of retweeting an alleged racial slur Spadola provided his opinion about the President of the United States and the NCAA disagreed with his Tweet? Would Spadola have been banned from the playoffs?
The NCAA must tread very carefully in the social media space because its actions may open itself and/or its members to massive legal liability that may not be anticipated. Those who advocate that student-athletes be mandated to turn over their private social media user names and passwords and/or allow schools access to students' private electronic content, and/or install spying software onto students' personal electronic devices may be uninformed of the law and the public policy implications. Ohio's Supreme Court ruled almost 2 years ago that while under Ohio's jurisdiction a warrantless search of electronic devices is barred in most situations. The New York Times subsequently wrote an editorial that stated that this should be the law throughout the country.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Playing collegiate sports is privilege and not a right. Ryan Spadola apologized for the tweet and appeared contrite over his actions. However, the NCAA still made an example out of him. This teachable moment has turned into a situation that may have major legal ramifications in the future for similar situations. What if instead of retweeting an alleged racial slur Spadola provided his opinion about the President of the United States and the NCAA disagreed with his Tweet? Would Spadola have been banned from the playoffs?
The NCAA must tread very carefully in the social media space because its actions may open itself and/or its members to massive legal liability that may not be anticipated. Those who advocate that student-athletes be mandated to turn over their private social media user names and passwords and/or allow schools access to students' private electronic content, and/or install spying software onto students' personal electronic devices may be uninformed of the law and the public policy implications. Ohio's Supreme Court ruled almost 2 years ago that while under Ohio's jurisdiction a warrantless search of electronic devices is barred in most situations. The New York Times subsequently wrote an editorial that stated that this should be the law throughout the country.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Cleveland's Social Media Criminal Law May Affect Terry Stop and Frisks
I have previously discussed Cleveland's prior misguided attempts to create ambiguous social media law. Cleveland has finally passed a law that may criminalize social media. This new ordinance (see page 25, sections 1392-11, 1393-11 and 1394-11) that allegedly is aimed at trying to curb flash mobs is very troubling and may create unanticipated problems that were not envisioned by its sponsors.
Will Cleveland police officers during a Terry Stop and Frisk check to see if someone is carrying a digital weapon (personal electronic device) instead of a physical weapon (gun or a knife)? Will this new ordinance change the Stop and Frisk procedures in Cleveland? Was this question even imagined by those who voted in favor of this ordinance?
Fortunately for those who live and/or visit Cleveland, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled a couple years ago that while under Ohio's jurisdiction people have an expectation of privacy regarding the content on their cell phones. Therefore, the potential for abuse of this new ordinance may be less than what it may have been had the Ohio Supreme Court not been so enlightened.
As I previously stated, this law is vague and will only create more problems than it will solve. The tremendous disconnect between social media and government policy continues.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Will Cleveland police officers during a Terry Stop and Frisk check to see if someone is carrying a digital weapon (personal electronic device) instead of a physical weapon (gun or a knife)? Will this new ordinance change the Stop and Frisk procedures in Cleveland? Was this question even imagined by those who voted in favor of this ordinance?
Fortunately for those who live and/or visit Cleveland, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled a couple years ago that while under Ohio's jurisdiction people have an expectation of privacy regarding the content on their cell phones. Therefore, the potential for abuse of this new ordinance may be less than what it may have been had the Ohio Supreme Court not been so enlightened.
As I previously stated, this law is vague and will only create more problems than it will solve. The tremendous disconnect between social media and government policy continues.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, December 9, 2011
Cleveland Should Stop Trying To Criminalize Social Media
Cleveland is still trying to criminalize social media. If at first you don't succeed, try, try, again must be Cleveland's City Council slogan. On July 25, 2011, August 5, 2011, and on October 6, 2011 I wrote about Cleveland's prior attempts to criminalize social media flash mobs, tweet ups, get togethers, etc...
When I spoke with Thomas Ott of the Cleveland Plain Dealer in October I was quoted as saying that the law is still vague and that Cleveland has more work to do on the legislation. Unfortunately, Cleveland's City Council took my words literally and decided to redraft their legislation.
This proposed ordinance will create more problems than it will solve. If Cleveland's Mayor signs the proposal it may be tested during the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony next year. If a majority of Guns N' Roses (they deserved induction) original lineup plays at the ceremony or makes appearances in Cleveland and fans use social media for a tweet up and criminal activity occurs fans may be rounded up and prosecuted for using a hashtag such as #gunsnroses.
It is time for common sense to prevail. Cleveland should focus their resources on more productive matters than drafting and trying to enforce vague social media law(s).
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
When I spoke with Thomas Ott of the Cleveland Plain Dealer in October I was quoted as saying that the law is still vague and that Cleveland has more work to do on the legislation. Unfortunately, Cleveland's City Council took my words literally and decided to redraft their legislation.
This proposed ordinance will create more problems than it will solve. If Cleveland's Mayor signs the proposal it may be tested during the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremony next year. If a majority of Guns N' Roses (they deserved induction) original lineup plays at the ceremony or makes appearances in Cleveland and fans use social media for a tweet up and criminal activity occurs fans may be rounded up and prosecuted for using a hashtag such as #gunsnroses.
It is time for common sense to prevail. Cleveland should focus their resources on more productive matters than drafting and trying to enforce vague social media law(s).
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Congress May Update the Video Privacy Protection Act
Congress may update the 1988 Video Privacy Protection Act because Netflix wants to build a Facebook application that may enable consumers to more easily share their movie choices and opinions. HR2471 may only benefit Netflix, Facebook, and third parties who may access the data. Netflix and Facebook users can already share their movie likes and dislikes online without any new legislation. Therefore, is there a reason to weaken a law that has protected the privacy of those living in the United States for more than 20 years?
As we have seen over and over again, data breaches occur frequently so it would be prudent to study this issue before passing a law that may have unintended side effects. Should Congress weaken a law that protects the personal privacy of more than 300 million people in the United States?
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
As we have seen over and over again, data breaches occur frequently so it would be prudent to study this issue before passing a law that may have unintended side effects. Should Congress weaken a law that protects the personal privacy of more than 300 million people in the United States?
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, December 1, 2011
Better Business Bureau Takes A Firm Stand Against Social Media Credential Fraud
The Better Business Bureau recently took a firm stand against Social Media Credential Fraud. The BBB stated that "marketers must be careful what they promise in exchange for a "Like" on Facebook and that they are not using misleading or artificial means to inflate the number of Facebook likes."
Social Media Credential Fraud may also be referred to as Like-Gating since the concept is the same in that misleading or artificial means are utilized to boost one's social media metrics. Social Media Credential Fraud may occur when an individual manipulates his social media metrics such as the Twitter following to follower ratio for commercial gain.
I have stated over and over again that Social Media Credential Fraud is a growing problem that must be eliminated. I have come out strongly against this practice and now the Better Business Bureau has agreed with my position. It is only a matter of time before the Federal Trade Commission begins proceedings against those who are practicing Social Media Credential Fraud and/or Like-Gating.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved
Social Media Credential Fraud may also be referred to as Like-Gating since the concept is the same in that misleading or artificial means are utilized to boost one's social media metrics. Social Media Credential Fraud may occur when an individual manipulates his social media metrics such as the Twitter following to follower ratio for commercial gain.
I have stated over and over again that Social Media Credential Fraud is a growing problem that must be eliminated. I have come out strongly against this practice and now the Better Business Bureau has agreed with my position. It is only a matter of time before the Federal Trade Commission begins proceedings against those who are practicing Social Media Credential Fraud and/or Like-Gating.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Governor Brownback's Staff Twitter Overreaction Has Caused Cyberbullying
Last week, Kansas High School student Emma Sullivan used Twitter to discuss her feelings about Governor Sam Brownback. While participating in a Youth in Government Program Sullivan tweeted, "Just made mean comments at gov brownback and told him he sucked, in person #heblowsalot.
Governor Brownback's office was not amused by the Tweet and Niomi Burget, assistant director of scheduling for the governor forwarded the tweet to Deborah Brown of the Shawnee Mission School District who then contacted Sullivan's principal. Sullivan was "asked" to write an apology to the governor but refused. Whether Sullivan was "asked" or "ordered" to write an apology to the governor is a question that needs to be answered since Sullivan was exercising her First Amendment right to criticize the governor.
Does Governor Brownback's office spend a significant amount of time and public resources on social media monitoring? Does his office spend taxpayer dollars to deploy a social media monitoring service? Or, does his office spend taxpayer dollars to do Twitter searches on a regular basis? What type of resources does his office allocate to social media monitoring and how does it determine when to react?
I told the Associated Press that this incident reflects poorly on the governor's office and that it needs to learn how to properly deal with social media related issues. It is disappointing that Governor Brownback's office still has not properly put this issue to bed.
Sullivan is now being cyberbullied because Governor Brownback's office did not understand how to respond to a negative tweet from a high school student. When Governor Brownback's office is interested in learning how to properly resolve this matter he may contact me at 301-652-3600 or at bshear@shearlaw.com.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Governor Brownback's office was not amused by the Tweet and Niomi Burget, assistant director of scheduling for the governor forwarded the tweet to Deborah Brown of the Shawnee Mission School District who then contacted Sullivan's principal. Sullivan was "asked" to write an apology to the governor but refused. Whether Sullivan was "asked" or "ordered" to write an apology to the governor is a question that needs to be answered since Sullivan was exercising her First Amendment right to criticize the governor.
Does Governor Brownback's office spend a significant amount of time and public resources on social media monitoring? Does his office spend taxpayer dollars to deploy a social media monitoring service? Or, does his office spend taxpayer dollars to do Twitter searches on a regular basis? What type of resources does his office allocate to social media monitoring and how does it determine when to react?
I told the Associated Press that this incident reflects poorly on the governor's office and that it needs to learn how to properly deal with social media related issues. It is disappointing that Governor Brownback's office still has not properly put this issue to bed.
Sullivan is now being cyberbullied because Governor Brownback's office did not understand how to respond to a negative tweet from a high school student. When Governor Brownback's office is interested in learning how to properly resolve this matter he may contact me at 301-652-3600 or at bshear@shearlaw.com.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Virginia Tech Cadet Utilizes YouTube to Ask Taylor Swift to Military Ball
On November 20th, 2011, I discussed with NBC 4 Washington's weekend anchor Angie Goff a recent trend regarding inviting celebrities to formal functions and Black Friday Deals on Facebook. To learn more about these issues watch the segment...
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
Penn State scandal proves NCAA schools should not social media monitor student athletes
The Penn State child molestation case against former Penn State coach Jerry Sandusky is already the worst college sports scandal of all time. It appears that Penn State officials may have had actual knowledge of the allegations against Sandusky since either 1999 or 2002 and did not take the appropriate actions necessary to stop him.
It is too soon to speculate, but it is possible that Penn State may have tremendous legal liability regarding the allegations against Sandusky even though Sandusky has not been an employee of the university since his retirement in 1999. These allegations have already led to reports that Penn State's bond rating may be downgraded in anticipation of the potential legal liability. If Penn State's bond rating is lowered it may make it more expensive for the school to borrow money for capital projects which may in turn harm Pennsylvania taxpayers and students who attend the university.
It is too soon to speculate, but it is possible that Penn State may have tremendous legal liability regarding the allegations against Sandusky even though Sandusky has not been an employee of the university since his retirement in 1999. These allegations have already led to reports that Penn State's bond rating may be downgraded in anticipation of the potential legal liability. If Penn State's bond rating is lowered it may make it more expensive for the school to borrow money for capital projects which may in turn harm Pennsylvania taxpayers and students who attend the university.
It does not appear that Sanduksy created any incriminating social media posts about his alleged illegal activity. If Sandusky committed his crimes off campus on his own time and Penn State had no knowledge of his alleged wrongdoing it most likely would be difficult for Sandusky's alleged victims to win a civil suit against Penn State. However, if Penn State was aware of Sandusky's alleged criminal activities and failed to stop him the school may have major legal liability issues to defend against.
NCAA schools do not have a legal duty to monitor the social media content of their student-athletes. However, there are some schools that are creating the duty to monitor their student-athletes' public and private social media content. I have discussed the numerous constitutional and legal liability issues involved with social media monitoring student-athletes on multiple occasions.
If a school decides to create the duty to monitor its student-athletes social media content and fails to prevent a student-athlete from committing a crime or an incident that creates civil liability that may have been noticed via the student's social media activity the school may have Penn State like liability issues to defend against.
After the Penn State scandal, I find it hard to believe that a school would even think about creating a duty to monitor the social media content of its student-athletes. If Penn State had a monitoring policy in place for its student-athletes or employees and missed any social media posts that hinted at any illegal activity Penn State's liability for this terrible tragedy would be even greater than it already may be.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
After the Penn State scandal, I find it hard to believe that a school would even think about creating a duty to monitor the social media content of its student-athletes. If Penn State had a monitoring policy in place for its student-athletes or employees and missed any social media posts that hinted at any illegal activity Penn State's liability for this terrible tragedy would be even greater than it already may be.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at http://shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, November 10, 2011
US should investigate why Sandusky was arrested after Paterno broke the Division I wins record
Should the U.S. investigate why Jerry Sandusky was arrested only after Joe Paterno broke Eddie Robinson's record of 408 wins? I find it troubling that only after Paterno broke the record for most wins by a Division I football coach was Paterno's longtime defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky arrested for child rape and sodomy. Did this delay cause more young boys to be put in harm's way so a football coach could claim a significant historical record before a scandal engulfed him?
Did Sandusky violate the Mann Act? Did Sandusky transport minors across state lines and sodomize or rape them? In 1998, one of Sandusky's victims was listed as a member of Sandusky's family for the Outback Bowl. Did Sandusky take any other victims with him across state lines to a Penn State football game?
It is too early to speculate on Penn State's potential liability in this scandal. However, today a jury in Miami-Dade Circuit Court awarded a sex abuse victim $100 million dollars. Therefore, between legal fees, settlements, judgments, possible fines etc... it is possible that this scandal may cost Penn State $100 million dollars or more. This does not factor in the damage to its reputation along with the loss of future economic opportunities.
This already appears to be the worst college sports scandal of all time. Covering up child rape and sodomy on campus to protect an institution's reputation is unforgivable and indefensible. Why didn't someone who knew about the allegations against Sandusky put a stop to him years ago?
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, November 8, 2011
Joe Paterno, Penn State, Social Media Crisis Management, and the Law
Joe Paterno's days as a head college football coach, teacher, and mentor to young men may be fast approaching an end. It may be a week, a few days, or even hours before he is no longer the head football coach of Penn State. One of the most respected college coaches of all time is on his way out because Penn State is embroiled in a child molestation scandal. Paterno's former defensive coordinator Jerry Sandusky has been charged with sexually abusing eight boys during a 15-year period.
Did Paterno break any laws? It is too soon to speculate until the investigation is completed and all of the facts come to light. However, under Pennsylvania Code Title 23-Domestic Relations, Chapter 63-Child Protective Services, Section 6311-Persons required to report suspected child abuse, school teachers and school administrators are required to report suspected child abuse to the proper authorities. It is alleged that Paterno reported a 2002 allegation against Sandusky that he was made aware of to his superiors; but under Pennsylvania law did Paterno fulfill all of his reporting obligations?
Did Paterno break any laws? It is too soon to speculate until the investigation is completed and all of the facts come to light. However, under Pennsylvania Code Title 23-Domestic Relations, Chapter 63-Child Protective Services, Section 6311-Persons required to report suspected child abuse, school teachers and school administrators are required to report suspected child abuse to the proper authorities. It is alleged that Paterno reported a 2002 allegation against Sandusky that he was made aware of to his superiors; but under Pennsylvania law did Paterno fulfill all of his reporting obligations?
Paterno is not just a coach to some of his players and other young men, he may also be a father figure. The allegation that Paterno did not do everything in his power to expose the truth about Sandusky and stop him from molesting other boys is very troubling.
If the allegations against Sandusky are true, it is possible that Penn State may have tremendous civil legal liability. If Paterno, or any Penn State administrators knew Sandusky may have been violating the law while Sandusky was an employee or utilizing Penn State's facilities a strong civil case for negligence against Penn State may be successful.
Yesterday evening I read about a Facebook page entitled,"Joe Paterno should resign." Last night it had around 80 members. Less than 24 hours later there are more than 300 members and counting. Social Media has made this story spread like wild fire and I believe that the anger these allegations have created will lead to Paterno's departure in the very near future.
To learn more about social media crisis management in sports you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
If the allegations against Sandusky are true, it is possible that Penn State may have tremendous civil legal liability. If Paterno, or any Penn State administrators knew Sandusky may have been violating the law while Sandusky was an employee or utilizing Penn State's facilities a strong civil case for negligence against Penn State may be successful.
Yesterday evening I read about a Facebook page entitled,"Joe Paterno should resign." Last night it had around 80 members. Less than 24 hours later there are more than 300 members and counting. Social Media has made this story spread like wild fire and I believe that the anger these allegations have created will lead to Paterno's departure in the very near future.
To learn more about social media crisis management in sports you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Sunday, November 6, 2011
Supreme Court Must Uphold 4th Amendment Protections in the Social Media Age
This week the Supreme Court will hear arguments in United States v. Jones regarding whether installing a GPS device on a suspect's car without a warrant is constitutional. This case may have far reaching ramifications in the Social Media Age because it may create the foundation to determine whether electronic data in various platforms may be protected by the 4th Amendment.
On April 29, 2010 and July 25, 2010, I discussed how Congress may pass the Social Media Privacy Protection Act. This act may be able to protect our electronic content from unreasonable searches and seizures in the Social Media Age. Last month, I discussed how California Governor Jerry Brown recently vetoed legislation that would have required a warrant to search the cell phone of a person who has been arrested in California. If the Supreme Court does not set limits on how the police may deploy electronic tracking devices I would not be surprised if Congress steps in to address this matter.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
On April 29, 2010 and July 25, 2010, I discussed how Congress may pass the Social Media Privacy Protection Act. This act may be able to protect our electronic content from unreasonable searches and seizures in the Social Media Age. Last month, I discussed how California Governor Jerry Brown recently vetoed legislation that would have required a warrant to search the cell phone of a person who has been arrested in California. If the Supreme Court does not set limits on how the police may deploy electronic tracking devices I would not be surprised if Congress steps in to address this matter.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
NJ Fake Facebook Page Case May Open Up A Pandora's Box
Earlier today, a judge in New Jersey declined to dismiss a case against a defendant charged with creating a fake Facebook page of her ex-boyfriend that appeared to defame him. This ruling may open up a Pandora's box and create more problems than anticipated.
While the Morris County New Jersey prosecutor's office may believe New Jersey's identity theft law should govern fake social media profiles that appear to defame others I am not sure if they fully understand the ramifications of its position. There are tens of thousands of fake social media pages on social media platforms. Therefore, will everyone who is under New Jersey's jurisdiction who has created a fake social media page be prosecuted for identity theft under New Jersey law?
I told the Associated Press that this case sounds like it may be better handled in civil rather than criminal court. It appears that there may be a violation of Facebook’s terms of service. This is a novel interpretation of New Jersey's identity theft law and it may be difficult for the defendant to be ultimately adjudicated guilty. California has specifically addressed this issue through legislation along with New York and Mississippi. It is likely that other states may soon follow suit.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
While the Morris County New Jersey prosecutor's office may believe New Jersey's identity theft law should govern fake social media profiles that appear to defame others I am not sure if they fully understand the ramifications of its position. There are tens of thousands of fake social media pages on social media platforms. Therefore, will everyone who is under New Jersey's jurisdiction who has created a fake social media page be prosecuted for identity theft under New Jersey law?
I told the Associated Press that this case sounds like it may be better handled in civil rather than criminal court. It appears that there may be a violation of Facebook’s terms of service. This is a novel interpretation of New Jersey's identity theft law and it may be difficult for the defendant to be ultimately adjudicated guilty. California has specifically addressed this issue through legislation along with New York and Mississippi. It is likely that other states may soon follow suit.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Insurance Companies May Be Following Your Tweets
Discussing your personal health or emotional well being on social media is not recommended. Health insurance companies, law enforcement, opposing counsel in lawsuits, employers, potential employers, academic institutions, etc... want access to both your public and private social media content. Therefore, everything you put online may one day be used against you.
On October 22, 2011 I discussed some of the reasons why you must be careful about posting online your personal health care status with Angie Goff of NBC 4 in Washington, DC. During the segment, Angie mentioned how Senator McCaskill used Twitter to discuss her progress during her recent 50 pound weight loss. While it may seem like a great idea at first glance to share this type of information with other people who are interested in losing weight it is not advisable.
Insurance companies may utilize your Tweets against you during the underwriting process and/or if and when you have a claim. In the United Kingdom, those who utilize social media may have to pay higher premiums.
Below are several tips regarding social media and health care privacy:
1) Avoid discussing your personal physical or emotional health status online
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
On October 22, 2011 I discussed some of the reasons why you must be careful about posting online your personal health care status with Angie Goff of NBC 4 in Washington, DC. During the segment, Angie mentioned how Senator McCaskill used Twitter to discuss her progress during her recent 50 pound weight loss. While it may seem like a great idea at first glance to share this type of information with other people who are interested in losing weight it is not advisable.
View more videos at: http://nbcwashington.com.
Insurance companies may utilize your Tweets against you during the underwriting process and/or if and when you have a claim. In the United Kingdom, those who utilize social media may have to pay higher premiums.
Below are several tips regarding social media and health care privacy:
1) Avoid discussing your personal physical or emotional health status online
2) Do not talk about the non-public health status of your online "friends"
3) Do not post about the medications you are taking
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, October 21, 2011
Missouri repeals social media ban aimed at online student teacher interaction
Missouri repealed its recently enacted student-teacher social media ban which prohibited students and teachers from interacting with each other online. I wrote about the law on August 2, 2011 and at the time stated:
"there is a tremendous lack of understanding regarding social media by elected officials across the country. Does Missouri have a law that bans teachers and students from being able to join the same Churches, Mosques, and Synagogues? Does Missouri have a law that bans teachers from interacting with students in activities outside of the school environment?...This new law is an over-reaction and will most likely soon be challenged and eventually overturned."
Missouri did the right thing in repealing the law because it not only infringed on First Amendment rights but it would also be very difficult if not impossible to enforce. When enacting new legislation lawmakers must understand exactly how the law works and how it may affect constitutional rights.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
"there is a tremendous lack of understanding regarding social media by elected officials across the country. Does Missouri have a law that bans teachers and students from being able to join the same Churches, Mosques, and Synagogues? Does Missouri have a law that bans teachers from interacting with students in activities outside of the school environment?...This new law is an over-reaction and will most likely soon be challenged and eventually overturned."
Missouri did the right thing in repealing the law because it not only infringed on First Amendment rights but it would also be very difficult if not impossible to enforce. When enacting new legislation lawmakers must understand exactly how the law works and how it may affect constitutional rights.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 13, 2011
Will the 4th Amendment protect us in the Social Media Age?
Since entering law school in the Fall of 1995, I have watched how the law has evolved to deal with the issues inherent in the Internet Age and now the Social Media Age. The proliferation of cellphones, laptops, Blackberries, iPhones, iPads, Droids, etc... enables us to house our entire lives in one portable electronic device.
It is great to have all of our personal information easily accessible in one place. However, with all of this technology there are many privacy issues that need to be addressed. For example, does the government have the right to access the data contained in our cell phones and other personal electronic devices without a warrant?
In California, Governor Jerry Brown vetoed legislation that would have required a warrant to search the cell phone of a person who has been arrested. This decision by Governor Brown demonstrates a lack of understanding of technology and how we are using it. Cellphones and other personal electronic devices along with our electronic accounts contain a tremendous amount of personal information.
Searching our cell phones, Droids, Blackberries, iPhones, etc....may be akin to searching our homes. Some people keep more private information on their personal electronic devices than in their home so our personal electronic devices should have the same 4th Amendment protections that apply to our homes. California allows law enforcement officials to search a person's cell phone without a warrant if they arrested. However, in Ohio, a warrant is required to search a cell phone unless it is necessary to preserve evidence or unless it is necessary for an officer's safety.
Unless there are exigent circumstances, law enforcement should have no right to search our personal electronic devices unless they have a warrant. We live in a world where all of our personal information can be carried around with us in a small electronic device. Therefore, it is time for the 4th Amendment's protections to account for the Social Media Age.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
It is great to have all of our personal information easily accessible in one place. However, with all of this technology there are many privacy issues that need to be addressed. For example, does the government have the right to access the data contained in our cell phones and other personal electronic devices without a warrant?
In California, Governor Jerry Brown vetoed legislation that would have required a warrant to search the cell phone of a person who has been arrested. This decision by Governor Brown demonstrates a lack of understanding of technology and how we are using it. Cellphones and other personal electronic devices along with our electronic accounts contain a tremendous amount of personal information.
Searching our cell phones, Droids, Blackberries, iPhones, etc....may be akin to searching our homes. Some people keep more private information on their personal electronic devices than in their home so our personal electronic devices should have the same 4th Amendment protections that apply to our homes. California allows law enforcement officials to search a person's cell phone without a warrant if they arrested. However, in Ohio, a warrant is required to search a cell phone unless it is necessary to preserve evidence or unless it is necessary for an officer's safety.
Unless there are exigent circumstances, law enforcement should have no right to search our personal electronic devices unless they have a warrant. We live in a world where all of our personal information can be carried around with us in a small electronic device. Therefore, it is time for the 4th Amendment's protections to account for the Social Media Age.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, October 6, 2011
Cleveland's continued misguided attempt at social media criminal law
Cleveland's City Council continues in its misguided attempt to create vague and unconstitutional social media criminal law. Cleveland's City Council is trying again to specifically criminalize the use of electronic media to create flash mobs.
This past summer, Cleveland's City Council tried to regulate the use of social media and fortunately for the citizens of Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson vetoed the flawed legislation. As I told the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Cleveland should utilize its resources to provide its law enforcement officials social media training instead of drafting vague and misguided ordinances that will create more problems. I recommend Cleveland focusing its energy on enforcing its current laws and determining how to apply them to social media.
Maybe Cleveland's City Council should focus its efforts on banning its fans from standing up and cheering at the Brown's games. Oops. Somebody beat them to it.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
This past summer, Cleveland's City Council tried to regulate the use of social media and fortunately for the citizens of Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson vetoed the flawed legislation. As I told the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Cleveland should utilize its resources to provide its law enforcement officials social media training instead of drafting vague and misguided ordinances that will create more problems. I recommend Cleveland focusing its energy on enforcing its current laws and determining how to apply them to social media.
Maybe Cleveland's City Council should focus its efforts on banning its fans from standing up and cheering at the Brown's games. Oops. Somebody beat them to it.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Monday, October 3, 2011
Hank Williams, Social Media Crisis Management, and the Contract Morals Clause
Hank Williams must go into crisis management mode immediately if he wants to retain his corporate marketability. This morning on "Fox and Friends" Williams appeared to compare President Obama to Adolf Hitler. Williams was asked to clarify his initial analogy and he stated that Obama and Vice President Biden are "the enemy." Subsequently, ESPN pulled his opening for this evening's Monday Night Football game.
During the past 23 seasons, Williams has provided an introduction for Monday Night Football based off of his hit song "All My Rowdy Friends Are Coming Over Tonight." If Williams does not want to permanently harm his corporate marketability he must act swiftly and apologize for his remarks. If not, ESPN may permanently remove his opening act from Monday Night Football and the NFL community may distance itself from him in the same manner that CBS ended its relationship with Jimmy (the Greek) Snyder for his comments in 1988 regarding African-American athletes.
A well-drafted morals clause may provide ESPN the ability to terminate its relationship with Williams for his comments without having to pay him for the duration of his contract. A contract morals clause provides a company the ability to terminate the services of an endorser if the endorser engages in activity that is inconsistent with a company's public image.
Williams' response over the next couple days will determine whether the NFL community will continue to embrace him. It is possible the incident may blow over. However, in the Social Media Age one comment, blog post, YouTube video, or Tweet has the ability to forever change one's circumstances. Therefore, the sooner Williams demonstrates remorse the better chance he has of retaining his relationship with ESPN and the NFL.
To learn how to respond to a crisis in the Social Media Age you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
During the past 23 seasons, Williams has provided an introduction for Monday Night Football based off of his hit song "All My Rowdy Friends Are Coming Over Tonight." If Williams does not want to permanently harm his corporate marketability he must act swiftly and apologize for his remarks. If not, ESPN may permanently remove his opening act from Monday Night Football and the NFL community may distance itself from him in the same manner that CBS ended its relationship with Jimmy (the Greek) Snyder for his comments in 1988 regarding African-American athletes.
A well-drafted morals clause may provide ESPN the ability to terminate its relationship with Williams for his comments without having to pay him for the duration of his contract. A contract morals clause provides a company the ability to terminate the services of an endorser if the endorser engages in activity that is inconsistent with a company's public image.
Williams' response over the next couple days will determine whether the NFL community will continue to embrace him. It is possible the incident may blow over. However, in the Social Media Age one comment, blog post, YouTube video, or Tweet has the ability to forever change one's circumstances. Therefore, the sooner Williams demonstrates remorse the better chance he has of retaining his relationship with ESPN and the NFL.
To learn how to respond to a crisis in the Social Media Age you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
University of North Carolina's Student-Athlete Social Media Policy May Be Unconstitutional
The University of North Carolina (UNC) recently updated its Department of Athletics Policy on Student-Athlete Social Networking and Media Use. It appears that UNC revised its student-athlete social media policy as part of its response to the NCAA Notice of Allegations (NOA) that alleged that it failed to monitor the social media activity of its student-athletes. According to an NCAA spokesman, the NCAA does not require its members to monitor the social media activity of its members; it only encourages schools to do so.
UNC's response to the NCAA NOA appears to agree with 8 of the 9 allegations. UNC appears to dispute the allegation that it failed to monitor the social media activity of its student-athletes. UNC's new student-athlete social media policy may have been created to try to mitigate some of the possible NCAA sanctions that may arise from this matter.
UNC is a public institution and therefore the 4th amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies and protects students from unreasonable searches and seizures by UNC. According to UNC's new social media policy, "Each team must identify at least one coach or administrator who is responsible for having access to and regularly monitoring the content of team members’ social networking sites and postings (“Team Monitor”). The Department of Athletics also reserves the right to have other staff members review and/or monitor student-athletes’ social networking sites and postings."
Students who participate in extracurricular activities have a diminished expectation of privacy compared to other students; however, that diminished expectation of privacy does not enable the state to access and monitor the private electronic content of student-athletes to ensure that there are no possible violations of the law, UNC policies, NCAA violations, etc... Students have a reasonable expectation of privacy for their non-public electronic communications. If UNC has a right to access the private social media posts of its student-athletes then what will stop UNC from claiming it has the right to access and monitor private email accounts, voice-mail messages, etc... and installing eavesdropping equipment into off-campus apartments?
Therefore, I believe UNC's new social media policy may violate the 1st, 4th, and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. I urge UNC to revise its new student-athlete social media policy before UNC has to utilize resources defending an unconstitutional policy that may create mistrust between its student-athletes and the university and tremendous legal liability issues.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
UNC's response to the NCAA NOA appears to agree with 8 of the 9 allegations. UNC appears to dispute the allegation that it failed to monitor the social media activity of its student-athletes. UNC's new student-athlete social media policy may have been created to try to mitigate some of the possible NCAA sanctions that may arise from this matter.
UNC is a public institution and therefore the 4th amendment of the U.S. Constitution applies and protects students from unreasonable searches and seizures by UNC. According to UNC's new social media policy, "Each team must identify at least one coach or administrator who is responsible for having access to and regularly monitoring the content of team members’ social networking sites and postings (“Team Monitor”). The Department of Athletics also reserves the right to have other staff members review and/or monitor student-athletes’ social networking sites and postings."
Students who participate in extracurricular activities have a diminished expectation of privacy compared to other students; however, that diminished expectation of privacy does not enable the state to access and monitor the private electronic content of student-athletes to ensure that there are no possible violations of the law, UNC policies, NCAA violations, etc... Students have a reasonable expectation of privacy for their non-public electronic communications. If UNC has a right to access the private social media posts of its student-athletes then what will stop UNC from claiming it has the right to access and monitor private email accounts, voice-mail messages, etc... and installing eavesdropping equipment into off-campus apartments?
Therefore, I believe UNC's new social media policy may violate the 1st, 4th, and 14th Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. I urge UNC to revise its new student-athlete social media policy before UNC has to utilize resources defending an unconstitutional policy that may create mistrust between its student-athletes and the university and tremendous legal liability issues.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, September 15, 2011
The FTC May Soon Crack Down On Social Media Credential Fraud
The FTC may soon crack down on Social Media Credential Fraud because it is a growing problem that will drastically harm monetization opportunities in the social media industry. Social Media Credential Fraud may occur when someone utilizes social media to create a false impression that they are an expert in their profession for commercial gain. Under the FTC's Advertising Regulations, it is crystal clear that engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices is unlawful.
This past summer the FTC sought input for revising its guidance to business about disclosures for online advertising. I submitted a comment requesting that the FTC take action against those who are practicing Social Media Credential Fraud.
On April 18, 2011, I stated that non-practicing attorney/self-described social media evangelist Adrian Dayton has a Twitter account that appears to indicate that he has a rock star like Twitter following to follower ratio. In this post, I discussed how Mr. Dayton had previously talked about why he un-followed 47,000 people on Twitter. The reason he gave for un-following almost 50,000 people went something along the lines he no longer could focus on new followers or qualified prospects because they were lost in the noise.
At that time I stated: "Having to follow at least 54,533 people in order to receive only 41,026 followers in return is not very "expert like." Mr. Dayton's Twitter activity demonstrates that he is a social media expert at one thing: following tens of thousands of people on Twitter and un-following tens of thousands of people on Twitter. That is it."
On January 13, 2011, Mr. Dayton was following 4,417 and had 41,049 followers.
On September 13, 2011, Mr. Dayton was following 8,613 but only had 41,203 followers in return.
During an 8 month period, it appears that Mr. Dayton increased the number of people he followed on Twitter from 4,417 to 8,613 (an increase of 4,196). However, during this time frame it appears that Mr. Dayton's number of followers has only gone up from 41,049 to 41,203. This is a net plus of a paltry 154 new followers. Are these the numbers of a bona fide social media strategist or evangelist?
Why would Mr. Dayton want to follow 4,000+ more people when he previously stated that he un-followed thousands of people because [he] was following so many people that [his] Twitter stream was filled with content that was at best irrelevant and at worse distracting? Could part of the answer be that Mr. Dayton is trying to keep at least 41,000 followers?
If you divide 4,196 by 154 it appears that Mr. Dayton may need to follow 27.25 people before 1 person will follow him in return. If you multiply 41,203 by 27.25 that equals 1,122,782. Therefore, it is possible that Mr. Dayton has had to follow 1 million plus people in order to receive only 41,000+ followers in return. Since Mr. Dayton's Twitter popularity is presumably at an all-time high now he may have previously needed to follow 30, 40, or 50 people before 1 person followed him back.
As I stated on April 18, 2011, I challenge Mr. Dayton to dispute my findings. If I was previously wrong Mr. Dayton would have publicly disputed me and/or threatened to sue me in the same manner that it appears he previously threatened lawyer Brian Tannebaum who pointed out some issues with Mr. Dayton's background.
Therefore, I want to reiterate, caveat emptor when hiring "experts". Don't be a sucker. At least perform a Google search to learn more about an "expert's" credentials. Just because someone calls himself/herself an expert and/or has a social media profile that appears "expert like" that does not make it so. As Malcolm Gladwell states, it takes at least 10,000 hours to master a craft.
To learn how to avoid violating the FTC Advertising Regulations you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
This past summer the FTC sought input for revising its guidance to business about disclosures for online advertising. I submitted a comment requesting that the FTC take action against those who are practicing Social Media Credential Fraud.
On April 18, 2011, I stated that non-practicing attorney/self-described social media evangelist Adrian Dayton has a Twitter account that appears to indicate that he has a rock star like Twitter following to follower ratio. In this post, I discussed how Mr. Dayton had previously talked about why he un-followed 47,000 people on Twitter. The reason he gave for un-following almost 50,000 people went something along the lines he no longer could focus on new followers or qualified prospects because they were lost in the noise.
At that time I stated: "Having to follow at least 54,533 people in order to receive only 41,026 followers in return is not very "expert like." Mr. Dayton's Twitter activity demonstrates that he is a social media expert at one thing: following tens of thousands of people on Twitter and un-following tens of thousands of people on Twitter. That is it."
On January 13, 2011, Mr. Dayton was following 4,417 and had 41,049 followers.
On September 13, 2011, Mr. Dayton was following 8,613 but only had 41,203 followers in return.
During an 8 month period, it appears that Mr. Dayton increased the number of people he followed on Twitter from 4,417 to 8,613 (an increase of 4,196). However, during this time frame it appears that Mr. Dayton's number of followers has only gone up from 41,049 to 41,203. This is a net plus of a paltry 154 new followers. Are these the numbers of a bona fide social media strategist or evangelist?
Why would Mr. Dayton want to follow 4,000+ more people when he previously stated that he un-followed thousands of people because [he] was following so many people that [his] Twitter stream was filled with content that was at best irrelevant and at worse distracting? Could part of the answer be that Mr. Dayton is trying to keep at least 41,000 followers?
If you divide 4,196 by 154 it appears that Mr. Dayton may need to follow 27.25 people before 1 person will follow him in return. If you multiply 41,203 by 27.25 that equals 1,122,782. Therefore, it is possible that Mr. Dayton has had to follow 1 million plus people in order to receive only 41,000+ followers in return. Since Mr. Dayton's Twitter popularity is presumably at an all-time high now he may have previously needed to follow 30, 40, or 50 people before 1 person followed him back.
As I stated on April 18, 2011, I challenge Mr. Dayton to dispute my findings. If I was previously wrong Mr. Dayton would have publicly disputed me and/or threatened to sue me in the same manner that it appears he previously threatened lawyer Brian Tannebaum who pointed out some issues with Mr. Dayton's background.
Therefore, I want to reiterate, caveat emptor when hiring "experts". Don't be a sucker. At least perform a Google search to learn more about an "expert's" credentials. Just because someone calls himself/herself an expert and/or has a social media profile that appears "expert like" that does not make it so. As Malcolm Gladwell states, it takes at least 10,000 hours to master a craft.
To learn how to avoid violating the FTC Advertising Regulations you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Saturday, September 10, 2011
September 11, 2001, Social Media Conspiracy Theories, and the Law
September 11, 2011 marks the 10th anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history. On September 11, 2001, 19 terrorists affiliated with al-Qaeda attacked the United States without any provocation. Ten years ago, I was living several blocks away from the World Trade Center and I witnessed first hand the tragedy and aftermath of this cowardly attack against our country. Due to the destruction that was caused, I became displaced from my home.
To my generation, Sept. 11th means what December 7th meant to my grandfather's generation. As President Roosevelt stated during a joint session of Congress on December 8, 1941, December 7, 1941 is a date that will live in infamy. President Bush's first official address post the September 11, 2001 attacks summed up our country's initial reaction to this act of cowardice.
Even though it is well established through eyewitness testimony, the physical evidence, and litigation that Islamic terrorists were behind the September 11, 2001 attacks, there are multiple social media pages, posts, videos, websites, etc... that claim that the U.S. and/or its allies attacked the U.S. to promote a certain agenda. Popular Mechanics did a cover story that debunked the 9/11 conspiracy theories in 2005 and recently created a book based upon their research. The bottom line is that Popular Mechanics pokes holes through the fantasies of the conspiracy theorists. I know what I witnessed that day. All five of my senses experienced the horror of that day. I highly doubt any of the self-professed conspiracy theorists witnessed in person the events of that day.
Utilizing social media to promote debunked theories regarding the 9/11 attacks is what cowards do. I challenge 9/11 conspiracy promoters to prove their theories because none of the conspiracy theories would hold up in court of law.
To learn how to uncover social media liars and con artists you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
To my generation, Sept. 11th means what December 7th meant to my grandfather's generation. As President Roosevelt stated during a joint session of Congress on December 8, 1941, December 7, 1941 is a date that will live in infamy. President Bush's first official address post the September 11, 2001 attacks summed up our country's initial reaction to this act of cowardice.
Even though it is well established through eyewitness testimony, the physical evidence, and litigation that Islamic terrorists were behind the September 11, 2001 attacks, there are multiple social media pages, posts, videos, websites, etc... that claim that the U.S. and/or its allies attacked the U.S. to promote a certain agenda. Popular Mechanics did a cover story that debunked the 9/11 conspiracy theories in 2005 and recently created a book based upon their research. The bottom line is that Popular Mechanics pokes holes through the fantasies of the conspiracy theorists. I know what I witnessed that day. All five of my senses experienced the horror of that day. I highly doubt any of the self-professed conspiracy theorists witnessed in person the events of that day.
Utilizing social media to promote debunked theories regarding the 9/11 attacks is what cowards do. I challenge 9/11 conspiracy promoters to prove their theories because none of the conspiracy theories would hold up in court of law.
To learn how to uncover social media liars and con artists you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, September 6, 2011
ESPN's New Social Media Policy Weakness Demonstrated By Peyton Manning Injury Story
ESPN's updated Social Media Policy went into effect approximately two weeks ago without much attention. On August 26, 2011, a few days after ESPN's new rules were implemented I stated,
During the last several years, many major news stories have been reported first on Twitter. Some of these stories include: the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, the 2009 Hudson River plane crash, and the death of Osama Bin Laden. During the NFL lockout earlier this year, sports reporters regularly posted breaking news updates on Twitter and then followed them up by more in depth articles at a later time.
Therefore, unless ESPN eliminates its "Do not break news on Twitter" guidelines, ESPN's reporters will risk other news outlets breaking news before ESPN has the ability to do so. The leaders of ESPN may want to rethink their new policy because as it stands it only hurts its ability to compete in the Social Media Age."
On September 4, 2011, John Michael Vincent of ESPN 1070 the Fan in Indianapolis tweeted, "Been told by multi sources that QB P Manning needs a 2nd neck procedure. Will remain out indefinitely.Called #colts and waiting on response."
This was a great scoop that sent the media and NFL fans into a frenzy trying to obtain official confirmation from the Indianapolis Colts about Peyton Manning's status for the season. Indianapolis was forced to issue a statement within 24 hours of Mr. Vincent's Tweet to discuss the matter. Fortunately for ESPN, Mr. Vincent works for them and ESPN as an organization may be credited for this breaking news.
What if Mr. Vincent waited until his radio show to discuss this breaking news and another reporter from a competing organization or a random social media user broke the story first because ESPN wants its talent to discuss breaking news on their platforms before using social media to disseminate information? A scoop like this does not happen every day and this is why ESPN must reevaluate its online policies to better reflect the reality of the Social Media Age.
To learn how your organization may create a Social Media Policy that does not harm your brand or bottom line you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
During the last several years, many major news stories have been reported first on Twitter. Some of these stories include: the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, the 2009 Hudson River plane crash, and the death of Osama Bin Laden. During the NFL lockout earlier this year, sports reporters regularly posted breaking news updates on Twitter and then followed them up by more in depth articles at a later time.
Therefore, unless ESPN eliminates its "Do not break news on Twitter" guidelines, ESPN's reporters will risk other news outlets breaking news before ESPN has the ability to do so. The leaders of ESPN may want to rethink their new policy because as it stands it only hurts its ability to compete in the Social Media Age."
On September 4, 2011, John Michael Vincent of ESPN 1070 the Fan in Indianapolis tweeted, "Been told by multi sources that QB P Manning needs a 2nd neck procedure. Will remain out indefinitely.Called #colts and waiting on response."
This was a great scoop that sent the media and NFL fans into a frenzy trying to obtain official confirmation from the Indianapolis Colts about Peyton Manning's status for the season. Indianapolis was forced to issue a statement within 24 hours of Mr. Vincent's Tweet to discuss the matter. Fortunately for ESPN, Mr. Vincent works for them and ESPN as an organization may be credited for this breaking news.
What if Mr. Vincent waited until his radio show to discuss this breaking news and another reporter from a competing organization or a random social media user broke the story first because ESPN wants its talent to discuss breaking news on their platforms before using social media to disseminate information? A scoop like this does not happen every day and this is why ESPN must reevaluate its online policies to better reflect the reality of the Social Media Age.
To learn how your organization may create a Social Media Policy that does not harm your brand or bottom line you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, September 2, 2011
Spying on NCAA Student-Athletes By Utilizing Social Media Monitoring Firms May Be Unconstitutional
As we begin the NCAA college football season, student-athlete social media usage is being hotly debated and dissected by the media. Some are advocating social media bans while others are recommending some of our country's future leaders to expose to third-party companies and/or school compliance departments their non-public private online interactions with others. After reading multiple articles from numerous major news outlets, I realize that some members of the media do not understand the legal issues involved with social media.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Monitoring the public social media posts of student-athletes is legal. In fact, it may be advisable to check up on a student-athlete's public online posts in the same manner as his/her real world activity. Checking up on a student in the real world encompasses face to face meetings, phone calls, class and study hall attendance record review, grade point average eligibility requirements, etc...
A couple months ago, Crain's Business Insurance discussed the legal liabilities that colleges and universities may encounter if they implement social media monitoring programs. None of the lawyers or risk professionals quoted in the Crain's Business Insurance article advocated that schools implement social media monitoring programs. In the same article an NCAA spokesperson stated, "the NCAA does not require its member schools to monitor the social media accounts of student athletes."
On June 22, 2011, and June 28, 2011 I touched upon the legality of utilizing social media monitoring services on student-athletes. The 1st, 4th, and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution may be violated along with numerous state and federal laws, and there may be discrimination claims when a public school's compliance department requires a student-athlete to participate in a social media monitoring program.
To better understand the issues involved with social media monitoring of private social media content it is essential to explain some of the details. For example, one social media monitoring company requires student-athletes to install social media monitoring and archiving software onto their personal electronic devices. Another company requires that student-athletes Facebook Friend them and/or allow them to follow a student's protected Twitter account. These companies then capture the student's social media activity and send it to the schools who hire them.
In addition to monitoring a student's private social media content these companies and/or a school's compliance department may also archive a student's private social media content for 4-7+ years. Therefore, instead of one entry point where data may be exposed there are at least 3 possible data leakage opportunities where a student's (and his/her online friends) private posts, photographs, messages, etc... may be disseminated to those who are not the intended recipients.
One of the social media monitoring firms boasts that its software has found numerous photographs of students in uncompromising positions. Of course it would find these photographs on students' private social media pages because students may have a reasonable expectation of privacy on their private social media accounts. This social media monitoring company also monetizes students' copyrighted photos by uploading them onto its corporate website as a selling point to prospective clients as to what material its service has found.
I highly doubt any student would under their own free will and accord install an invasive software program onto their personal computer that would enable a third-party to view, capture, archive, and monetize their or their friends' personal photographs and social media content. The social media monitoring companies that require students to install monitoring programs onto their personal electronic devices protect themselves legally with the terms of service in their user agreements that students must accept before installing their software and/or through the contracts it signs with athletic compliance departments.
I highly doubt any student would under their own free will and accord install an invasive software program onto their personal computer that would enable a third-party to view, capture, archive, and monetize their or their friends' personal photographs and social media content. The social media monitoring companies that require students to install monitoring programs onto their personal electronic devices protect themselves legally with the terms of service in their user agreements that students must accept before installing their software and/or through the contracts it signs with athletic compliance departments.
Another method used to gain access to student-athletes' private social media posts requires student-athletes to Facebook Friend a third-party social media monitoring company and/or its school's compliance department. If a public college or university requires its student-athletes to Facebook Friend a third-party and/or its compliance department it may be deemed an unreasonable search and seizure under the 4th amendment. Student-Athletes may have a reasonable expectation of privacy if their social media page is set to private and not available for all to access.
The activities described above are an outrageous disregard for the U.S. Constitution and numerous federal and state laws. Public schools that require their students-athletes to install social media monitoring software onto their personal computers and/or require student-athletes to provide access to their non-public social media pages to their compliance departments directly or via third-parties may already be facing tremendous legal liability. The companies who are providing social media monitoring services may also have significant legal liability challenges ahead.
The activities described above are an outrageous disregard for the U.S. Constitution and numerous federal and state laws. Public schools that require their students-athletes to install social media monitoring software onto their personal computers and/or require student-athletes to provide access to their non-public social media pages to their compliance departments directly or via third-parties may already be facing tremendous legal liability. The companies who are providing social media monitoring services may also have significant legal liability challenges ahead.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Corporate Counsel's IP Trademark, Copyright & Licensing Forum in New York City
ALM's Corporate Counsel is hosting a conference focused on the legal issues that are inherent with trademark, copyright and licensing. The conference will be held on September 14, and 15th at the Harvard Club of New York City. I have attended several of ALM's intellectual property conferences and each time they have covered very timely topics and have had outstanding faculty.
Some of the topics that will be covered include: trademark enforcement in a global economy, managing intellectual property as an asset, new generic top level domain names, and protecting your brand in the digital age. Some of the companies who will be presenting include: Playboy Enterprises, Inc., ABC, Inc., The New York Times, ESPN, and Macy's.
To learn more about the conference here is the link.
[Full Disclosure-Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Some of the topics that will be covered include: trademark enforcement in a global economy, managing intellectual property as an asset, new generic top level domain names, and protecting your brand in the digital age. Some of the companies who will be presenting include: Playboy Enterprises, Inc., ABC, Inc., The New York Times, ESPN, and Macy's.
To learn more about the conference here is the link.
[Full Disclosure-Shear on Social Media Law is part of ALM's Law.com Blog Network]
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Friday, August 26, 2011
ESPN's Social Media Policy May Assist Its Competitors
ESPN has been at the cutting edge of sports coverage since its launch on September 7, 1979. Its slogan is "The Worldwide Leader in Sports". As a longtime ESPN customer, I have always been interested in the wide variety of programming that ESPN has to offer. From its news to its original series to its game telecasts, ESPN does an excellent job of covering the world of sports.
ESPN first created a Social Media Policy for its employees in August 2009. The network's initial policy was heavily criticized and within hours of it becoming public ESPN publicly explained the policy. Within the last couple of days, ESPN has has updated its Social Media Policy or as it is officially called, its "Social Networking For Talent and Reporters" Policy.
The new policy's first two guidelines make sense: "Think before you [sic] tweet" and "Think before you retweet". However, the third guideline, "Do not break news on Twitter", demonstrates an utter lack of understanding of the Social Media Age. In addition, this guideline does not make sense because it further states, "In most cases, you [sic] tweet will also appear on ESPN.com". Since ESPN Talent and/or Reporters' Twitter feeds will be on ESPN.com it makes no sense to tell them they can't break news on their Twitter feeds. I understand the desire to drive as much traffic as possible onto ESPN or ESPN.com to keep the Nielsen Ratings or Alexa.com figures as high as possible which may increase advertising dollars. However, this policy will only harm its ability to compete in the fast changing digital landscape.
During the last several years, many major news stories have been reported first on Twitter. Some of these stories include: the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, the 2009 Hudson River plane crash, and the death of Osama Bin Laden. During the NFL lockout earlier this year, sports reporters regularly posted breaking news updates on Twitter and then followed them up by more in depth articles at a later time.
Therefore, unless ESPN eliminates its "Do not break news on Twitter" guideline, ESPN's reporters will risk other news outlets breaking news before ESPN has the ability to do so. The leaders of ESPN may want to rethink their new policy because as it stands it only hurts its ability to compete in the Social Media Age.
To learn how your organization may create a Social Media Policy that does not harm your brand or bottom line you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
ESPN first created a Social Media Policy for its employees in August 2009. The network's initial policy was heavily criticized and within hours of it becoming public ESPN publicly explained the policy. Within the last couple of days, ESPN has has updated its Social Media Policy or as it is officially called, its "Social Networking For Talent and Reporters" Policy.
The new policy's first two guidelines make sense: "Think before you [sic] tweet" and "Think before you retweet". However, the third guideline, "Do not break news on Twitter", demonstrates an utter lack of understanding of the Social Media Age. In addition, this guideline does not make sense because it further states, "In most cases, you [sic] tweet will also appear on ESPN.com". Since ESPN Talent and/or Reporters' Twitter feeds will be on ESPN.com it makes no sense to tell them they can't break news on their Twitter feeds. I understand the desire to drive as much traffic as possible onto ESPN or ESPN.com to keep the Nielsen Ratings or Alexa.com figures as high as possible which may increase advertising dollars. However, this policy will only harm its ability to compete in the fast changing digital landscape.
During the last several years, many major news stories have been reported first on Twitter. Some of these stories include: the 2008 Mumbai terrorist attacks, the 2009 Hudson River plane crash, and the death of Osama Bin Laden. During the NFL lockout earlier this year, sports reporters regularly posted breaking news updates on Twitter and then followed them up by more in depth articles at a later time.
Therefore, unless ESPN eliminates its "Do not break news on Twitter" guideline, ESPN's reporters will risk other news outlets breaking news before ESPN has the ability to do so. The leaders of ESPN may want to rethink their new policy because as it stands it only hurts its ability to compete in the Social Media Age.
To learn how your organization may create a Social Media Policy that does not harm your brand or bottom line you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Thursday, August 25, 2011
UK government pledges not to ban social media
According to the Guardian newspaper, the British government has pledged not to shut down social media during civil unrest. Home Secretary Theresa May told representatives of Research in Motion, Facebook, and Twitter that they have no intention of restricting internet services during public demonstrations.
This is a win for free speech and a major statement against censorship and totalitarianism. Dictators restrict the freedom of ideas when they do not agree with them but democracies do not. Blaming the UK's recent riots on social media would be the same as blaming the Arab Spring on social media.
The Gutenberg press, the telegraph, the telephone, radio, television, etc... never made people riot against their government. These technologies only enabled people to more freely connect and express their opinions with one another. Social Media may allow complete strangers with similar interests to interact with each other; however, social media does not make a person throw a Molotov cocktail at a government building.
Shutting down social media platforms and/or other forms of electronic communications during civil unrest may have unintended consequences. What if someone who is injured during a riot is unable to call for help because their communication device has been rendered inoperable due to a government shut down? In addition, a recent study by the Guardian has shown that it appears that social media was mainly utilized to react to the riots in the UK.
The bottom line is that governments should work to cure the problems that may cause civil unrest instead of blaming new electronic technologies that they do not fully understand.
To learn more about this issue you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
This is a win for free speech and a major statement against censorship and totalitarianism. Dictators restrict the freedom of ideas when they do not agree with them but democracies do not. Blaming the UK's recent riots on social media would be the same as blaming the Arab Spring on social media.
The Gutenberg press, the telegraph, the telephone, radio, television, etc... never made people riot against their government. These technologies only enabled people to more freely connect and express their opinions with one another. Social Media may allow complete strangers with similar interests to interact with each other; however, social media does not make a person throw a Molotov cocktail at a government building.
Shutting down social media platforms and/or other forms of electronic communications during civil unrest may have unintended consequences. What if someone who is injured during a riot is unable to call for help because their communication device has been rendered inoperable due to a government shut down? In addition, a recent study by the Guardian has shown that it appears that social media was mainly utilized to react to the riots in the UK.
The bottom line is that governments should work to cure the problems that may cause civil unrest instead of blaming new electronic technologies that they do not fully understand.
To learn more about this issue you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Social Media, Sports Media, NCAA Compliance, and Student-Athletes
When posting content on the Internet/Social Media it is imperative to be very careful what you say and how you say it. Everyone is capable of a slip of the tongue once in awhile. However, when comments are put online they become permanent. After one has been notified of an Internet/Social Media slip of the tongue he/she may want to quickly apologize and/or correct the record because in the Social Media Age you must realize that everything you put online has the ability to go viral and cause damage to your reputation very quickly.
On August 24, 2011, I read a Foxsports.com article by Jennifer Floyd Engel, entitled, "If the NCAA won't police self, NFL should". The article discussed Terrelle Pryor's five game suspension that was handed down by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell for what appears to be Pryor's behavior while a student-athlete at Ohio State. The NFL's disciplinary system is covered by its collective bargaining agreement and Goodell has wide latitude in punishing NFL players for their conduct on and off the field.
Ms. Engel brings up some interesting points regarding whether the NFL should discipline NCAA student-athletes for transgressions that occurred before they join the NFL. The NCAA has a problem on its hands regarding enforcement of its rules and regulations and Goodell's suspension of Pryor with what may be the blessing of the NFLPA could deter student-athletes from allegedly violating NCAA rules in the future. The recent problems at the University of Miami, the University of North Carolina, the University of Southern California, and Ohio State demonstrate that something needs to be done to deter NCAA violations.
However, Ms. Engel states, "Roger [NFL Commissioner] sent a clear message that the NFL will no longer be a safe harbor for college football terrorists"and "[w]hile the little terrorists (or those so accused by a very-little, admitted money terrorist, Shapiro) all have cushy landing spots — at Texas Tech and Missouri and the NFL..."
Calling student-athletes terrorists who may have violated NCAA rules demonstrates ignorance. Those who Ms. Engel refers to may be NCAA rule violators, rule breakers, or *$&#(@!%, but they are not terrorists. Ms. Engel has every right to refer to student-athletes who may violate NCAA rules and create very difficult situations for the schools, their fellow students, alumni, coaches, etc... as terrorists if she chooses to do so. I notified Ms. Engel that her online comments were inappropriate and her response appears to demonstrate ignorance of the situation. Ms. Engel should really think about the definition of a terrorist before calling some-student athletes terrorists and then defending her position.
On August 24, 2011, I read a Foxsports.com article by Jennifer Floyd Engel, entitled, "If the NCAA won't police self, NFL should". The article discussed Terrelle Pryor's five game suspension that was handed down by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell for what appears to be Pryor's behavior while a student-athlete at Ohio State. The NFL's disciplinary system is covered by its collective bargaining agreement and Goodell has wide latitude in punishing NFL players for their conduct on and off the field.
Ms. Engel brings up some interesting points regarding whether the NFL should discipline NCAA student-athletes for transgressions that occurred before they join the NFL. The NCAA has a problem on its hands regarding enforcement of its rules and regulations and Goodell's suspension of Pryor with what may be the blessing of the NFLPA could deter student-athletes from allegedly violating NCAA rules in the future. The recent problems at the University of Miami, the University of North Carolina, the University of Southern California, and Ohio State demonstrate that something needs to be done to deter NCAA violations.
However, Ms. Engel states, "Roger [NFL Commissioner] sent a clear message that the NFL will no longer be a safe harbor for college football terrorists"and "[w]hile the little terrorists (or those so accused by a very-little, admitted money terrorist, Shapiro) all have cushy landing spots — at Texas Tech and Missouri and the NFL..."
Calling student-athletes terrorists who may have violated NCAA rules demonstrates ignorance. Those who Ms. Engel refers to may be NCAA rule violators, rule breakers, or *$&#(@!%, but they are not terrorists. Ms. Engel has every right to refer to student-athletes who may violate NCAA rules and create very difficult situations for the schools, their fellow students, alumni, coaches, etc... as terrorists if she chooses to do so. I notified Ms. Engel that her online comments were inappropriate and her response appears to demonstrate ignorance of the situation. Ms. Engel should really think about the definition of a terrorist before calling some-student athletes terrorists and then defending her position.
Every time a student-athlete or professional athlete posts something online that may be deemed inappropriate members of the media attack them for their online behavior. Should the media call out Ms. Engel in the same manner that it castigates student-athletes and professional athletes when they make what some may deem inappropriate online comments?
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Telephone Flash Mobs, Celebrities, the Police, and Social Media
Is a telephone flash mob criminal? How do you prove that a series of Tweets directly caused a telephone flash mob? The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is trying to answer these questions after an artist who goes by the stage name, "The Game" allegedly tweeted the phone number of a sheriff's station on August 12th. It is alleged that The Game's tweets were directly responsible for a sheriff's station receiving hundreds of calls that tied up its phone lines for a few hours.
According to Mike Parker of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, The Game may be charged with "making annoying or harassing phone calls via [an] electronic device or the Internet,"delaying or obstructing peace officers in the performance of their duties," and "knowingly and maliciously disrupting or impeding communications over a public safety radio frequency".
The Game alleged in at least one of his Tweets that his account was hacked. If The Game's allegations are true he should file a complaint with the police because hacking is a violation under federal and state law.
Charging The Game for violating the law based on his alleged Tweets is one thing but proving it is another. A prosecutor may have to prove that The Game had the mens rea to jam the Sheriff Department's communications system. This may be extremely difficult unless there is a smoking gun that indicates that The Game intended to disrupt the sheriff department's phone lines.
I highly doubt that The Game will be successfully prosecuted for his alleged ill conceived tweets. However, this episode may encourage California and other states to create guidelines on how to respond to these situations in the future.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
According to Mike Parker of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, The Game may be charged with "making annoying or harassing phone calls via [an] electronic device or the Internet,"delaying or obstructing peace officers in the performance of their duties," and "knowingly and maliciously disrupting or impeding communications over a public safety radio frequency".
The Game alleged in at least one of his Tweets that his account was hacked. If The Game's allegations are true he should file a complaint with the police because hacking is a violation under federal and state law.
Charging The Game for violating the law based on his alleged Tweets is one thing but proving it is another. A prosecutor may have to prove that The Game had the mens rea to jam the Sheriff Department's communications system. This may be extremely difficult unless there is a smoking gun that indicates that The Game intended to disrupt the sheriff department's phone lines.
I highly doubt that The Game will be successfully prosecuted for his alleged ill conceived tweets. However, this episode may encourage California and other states to create guidelines on how to respond to these situations in the future.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.