Censorship In The Workplace

In today’s society, it is crucial for employees to understand the significance in the use of social media outlets such as Twitter and Facebook. This subject will discuss the primary reasons companies allow the usage of social networking sites in the workplace. It will also explain the positive impact social media usage has in the workplace, such as allowing communication to a broader audience. In addition to the positive usage, this topic will also explore the negative implications usage can cause. Because social media is still relatively new, there are not many laws establishing the proper guidelines for these sites in the workplace. Scholarly articles such as the ‘Workplace impact of social networking” examine the effects of not establishing said policies, an error which results in an unhealthy work environment. Ultimately, employees can positively influence the workplace by using social media if they have the proper guidelines to follow.

The NLRB has made findings regarding the use of employee posts on Social Media sites to discipline or terminate those employees. Typically these cases occur when an employee posts “negative” information about their current employer or boss. Sometimes these are “public” and other times the employer uses “spies” or “fake friending” to see the Facebook page of the employee.

I agree with the line of reasoning you are arguing here. Typically a business will limit what a person can say about that company, especially with the prevalence of social media. I think that while it is limiting your freedom of speech, you are correct in that an employer has a right to expect that of their employees. Many employers will not allow a person to use the workplace to promote their political or religious views. For example, you couldn't hand out fliers to your fellow employees inviting them to attend a political rally for a specific candidate or cause. You could do that on your own free time, but not in the workplace. That limits your freedoms as well. Why do you think an employer wouldn't allow that?

On the other hand, many employees more and more feel violated and disrespected. The world has become more digital which involves many aspects of a person’s life to be online. Over a billion people use Facebook regularly, where they upload personal information. The question is, do companies have the right to search Facebook to discover more about the person. In the article, Employers Use Facebook Too, for Hiring by Mary Oleniczak et al., Oleniczak demonstrates the lack of privacy workers are receiving. People on social media never post their whole story. Only some aspect of their life show up. If an employer looks at the site, they see one side of a person, they see a personal side that does not involve their work life. Also everyone is human, which means people can be selfish and rude. So maybe on a person’s site, that person seems great but another person keeps bashing them because for some reason that person does not like the other person. The basher makes the person look bad even if it is only the basher’s point of

In F451, Government uses censorship as a form of oppression, which is wrong because it takes away freedom and human rights. One way they do this is when firemen burn books to keep the populous from reading the books and obtaining information from them. Another way is how the government controls the people 's every move, “ My uncle was arrested another time… for being a pedestrian.” Page 7. Similar to they way Nazi Germany controlled the populous of its time. And how on the train they play loud music to keep people from focusing and thinking. One way of thinking in the book is that the government burns books because some of them make people unhappy. Governments use censorship as a form of oppression of the populous.

One major issue with the current use of social media is the policy of employers investigating their employee’s social media accounts. As Michaela Whitbourn of The Age notes, “The use of social media accounts to assess candidates for work, education and other opportunities was "an area of growing concern"(Whitbourn 1). In a world where political correctness and social justice reign supreme, businesses want to ensure that they are legally secured in the case of any negligence an employee may incur. Today, many companies would consider risqué or controversial social media posts as forms of negligence. There have been many occurrences over the last few years when an employee has been fired after making an insensitive, inappropriate, or immodest post on Facebook or Twitter. For example, “Ehling, a paramedic and nurse was terminated from her employment and sued… the key issues revolved around a Facebook post she made suggesting… paramedics should have allowed a patient with offensive political views to die”(Malouf 2). In fact as evidenced in another example, social media can disable someone from obtaining employment in the

It has already been 8 years, and I still don’t know how to take care of him. My child is a high maintenance Himalayan cat who needs to be constantly combed, but I still don’t know how to brush his fur. Most of the time, my sister is the one who combs him. All I do is pick up his waste, and play with him. I want to be able to make my cat look elegant, fluffy and beautiful as well. When I see my sister brush his fur, his purr echoes throughout the room, and he is slowly drifting off into his fish catching dreams.

The use of social media has greatly influenced how people communicate. Facebook, one of the largest social media platforms, has over one billion active users. Employers find social media both useful and challenging. Companies now have a platform to reach millions of potential users of their products for marketing purposes. The downside is their employees also have access to millions of users. In the case of Peter Whitney, Peter’s employer terminated Peter for disparaging comments about co-workers on his personal blog. He views his termination as unfair. As this technology develops, employees need to self-censor their social media to prevent termination.

Imagine a coworker posting a threatening statement towards the place they work. Even if they are exaggerating or joking, it’s unprofessional and would still be concerning for many employees. What you say or post online should be grounds on getting fired because of the first amendment rights and safety, loyalty towards the company, and how they represent the company.

In the modern sense, political correctness has become a form of censorship. With protestors forcing students to find alternate routes to school or pushing the administration to cancel guest speakers in fear of triggering students, the modern-day university is no longer a place of free, critical, thinking, but a place of censorship. Political correctness (is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended primarily not to offend or disadvantage any group of people in society. In Juan William’s essay, ‘Defying the PC Police’, he discusses censorship, PC culture, and excessive political correctness. For William, excessive political correctness was the basis of his argument against the “PC police” and was defined as political correctness that goes beyond being respect to the point at which it becomes censorship. Competitively, the United States of America has very minimal censorship as compared to North Korea, Burma, Turkmenistan, Equatorial Guinea, Libya, Eritrea, Cuba, Uzbekistan, and Belarus, the nations that have the highest levels of censorship. As displayed in books such as 1984, Fahrenheit 451, The Giver and Go Ask Alice, censorship is a very controversial topic. Where the line between freedom of speech and the press are often questioned by politicians and parents alike, in the recent years, censorship has become an idea that is no longer protecting people, but an idea that is taking people’s freedom on a skewed claim of protection.

Social networking sites such as Twitter or Facebook have created a new ethical dilemma for many businesses. Corporations, small businesses, and even universities are struggling create policies to manage their employees social networking behaviors. Social networking access, particularly for recruiters, can provide personal information about potential employees, which would otherwise not be available. A business must follow statutes and guidelines when disclosing information to the public. Individuals on social networking sites have no such constraints. Employees can and do make comments about their employers online. Employers can and do watch what employees post online. Any individual can send or post potentially damaging information

Vice President Al Gore once addressed the graduating class of 1996 from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology with the following statement; “Fear of chaos cannot justify unwarranted censorship of free speech” (Quittner). With this being said, Al Gore divulged his views on censorship which can now be translated into the current issue of censorship across one of the most advanced forms of communication- the internet.

Censorship is synonymous to control, restriction, suppression and even editing. Now in the modern age when the world is rapidly shifting towards global equality and a democratic state of mind, it would seem that there is no place for these terms let alone these notions. However, when we often debate over certain policies and issues, we consider the “greater good” behind an action and thus set it in motion. Same is the mindset which governs the debate of the issue of censorship. In order to establish a society which is built upon mutual respect and tolerance for others, censorship plays a vital role in spinning the delicate fabric which separates different beliefs, norms and mindsets. In order to create a collective conscience and form common

Sure the internet is a great wat to express our self, but other may misconstrue they see on our social media sites. I sympathize with Mr. Lewis, because employers shouldn’t have the right checkup or screen employee’s social media, which that would be their personal life. An employees shouldn’t not be judged on the lifestyle they life after workhours. Depending on what kind of job you have or trying to acquire yes it may be required but you will be notified. The American is being so political correct, that is hard to be our self if you have differences views from the majority of the any group of people. In my opinion there should be laws dealing with cases when employees get fried do to something they posted in social media. Billy Graham agrees when she writes, Once you've lost your privacy, you realize you've lost an extremely valuable thing.” Basically, Billy Graham is saying losing your privacy is one of the worst things you can lose, it’s a pieces of yourself that you can free with no judgment. Many people me may disagree with me, but I stay with my opinion. Ms. Flynn clam that employers have the right to monitor their employees anything they see fit, rests upon the questionable assumption that would it be morally right. by doing all this would create a hostile work environment, I do not agrees on employers having so a say on what can and not say on social media. Being an American you have freedom speech that being said I truly believe that is a violation of my civil right and nobody should be about to dictate what can you say or not

Censorship is the suppression of any books, films, news, etc. that are considered offensive, or may propose danger to society. Censorship has been around for centuries; even now, with the constitution and laws that protects our rights to freedom, censorship still managed to have somewhat of an impact on our lives today. It’s in the media, our education, and in other countries. But not everything about censorship is terrible, a certain length to what should be censored could be acceptable. It’s the general idea of exercising censorship could do harm to society without us even noticing it. Some countries that practice censorship can be extreme, their lives are turned around and they are not living their lives to their fullest potential. Thus, society should not practice censorship as it is used to promote negative agendas, violates people’s rights, and slows down innovation.