Only a week ago it was in the news that the UK was seeking to opt out of new European privacy laws governing social media. Article 17 of the Data Protection Regulation was drafted in response to complaints about Facebook and other social media sites holding onto private information. “The right to be forgotten” argument mirrors a similar scene between the freedom of expression and the right to a private life; articles 10 and 8 of The Human Rights Act 1998 respectively. And look how that turned out for the media; the Leveson enquiry.                                                                             http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2013/apr/04/britain-opt-out-right-to-be-forgotten-law 

This week Paris Brown; Britain’s first youth crime commissioner has been in the headlines after resigning from her £15,000 annual salaried one of a kind role over inappropriate Tweets. Paris has allegedly made reference to drugs, racism and homophobia on Twitter and which have resulted in a criminal police investigation. The teen had made these comments when she was 14 and again at 16 had said they were not meant to offend and were “bravado”.
“I accept that I have made comments on social networking sites which have offended many people. I am really sorry for any offence caused.

I strongly reiterate that I am not racist or homophobic. I have fallen into the trap of behaving with bravado on social networking sites. I hope this may stand as a learning experience for many other young people.

I now feel that in the interests of everyone concerned – in particular the young people of Kent who I feel will benefit enormously from the role of a youth commissioner – that I should stand down as I feel that the recent media furore will continue and hamper my ability to perform the job to the level required.”                                        http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/apr/09/paris-brown-stands-down-twitter

Had Paris Brown’s social media accounts been vetted, a process not required for the pay grade of that particular role; this issue could have been flagged up a lot earlier and save her some pain.

This begs the question as to how far engagement in social media does and should affect work prospects. It can be argued that the right to be forgotten would add the safeguards necessary to protect individuals’ privacy and allow transgressions to be erased. This would be particularly important for young people who may not always consider their future or career with sensibilities of which we would expect from an adult already in the work sphere.

It is a warning to all of us though. Online presence is becoming increasingly important as a way of showcasing skills, reputation and knowledge to employers. You may well be Googled, looked up on LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter or other networking sites. LinkedIn should be professional, that goes without saying. There are, in addition privacy controls which can be applied to keep social activity hidden. It is wise however for anyone wanting to ensure that they build or maintain a reputation of integrity, that all online activity is carefully considered. Have a tidy up if that is necessary. With the movement of the right to be forgotten regulation unclear in UK law, even profiles are tidied up may result in some data be retained by the provider; however it is always worth damage limitation. This may be a lengthy process for anyone who cyclically posts inappropriate or ill-considered drivel.

If you wouldn’t want it on you CV then don’t make it part of your visible online portfolio. Also be wary of joining groups and clubs online that reveal personal preferences that may be considered tasteless or inappropriate and if you lick toads in your spare time, probably best not to make it your Facebook cover photo.