Courts have long grappled with social media in a legal context. The struggle to understand social media issues -- and to craft coherent applicable legal policy -- renders Crowe v. Marquette Transportation Co. Gulf-Inland, LLC amusing to show how the less-than-honest actions of an employee-plaintiff can make these difficult legal questions fairly simple for a court.

As Comedy Central is discovering with the new host of The Daily Show, Trevor Noah, failure to fully vet an employee’s social media activity can have unexpected consequences. At the same time, an employee’s social media profiles can yield information that may be harmful to employers in the hiring process. There are potential pitfalls to examining an applicant’s social media profiles both too closely and not closely enough, and the lines are difficult to discern.

Businesses are increasingly relying on social media to establish and grow their products and/or services. While the advantages of using social media are vast (i.e., it is inexpensive, comes with a virtually global audience, and has frequent and immediate contact potential), it does come with risks. Among the dangers is failing to address who owns a social media account. This is very much still an emerging issue in the law, but some existing case law and best practices can provide guidance as to how these ownership cases develop and how they can be avoided.

Employers and business professionals are no strangers to “off-the-record” conversations and closed-door meetings. In today’s world, though, many long for a way to converse online without a permanent record of the conversation existing somewhere out there in Internet-land. New apps have responded to this need; think Snapchat (the popular app that allows users to set a predetermined time for how long recipients can view their photos) for text messaging. TigerText, Wickr, and Confide are just some of the self-destructing text apps that have recently emerged. Businesses, however, should proceed with caution when using these – they could not only present an air of impropriety but also be a legal hazard.

On Monday, I provided details about the Ehling case wherein an employee had made an inappropriate Facebook post and, unbeknownst to her, had that Facebook post sent to her manager by a Facebook “friend” and coworker.

Inappropriate Facebook posts, pictures and the like have led to many firings in recent years. A large number of employees have become smarter on social media and made a concerted effort to not “friend” a manager or boss. They think that they are keeping their online persona and work reputation separate…but is that really possible when dealing with the Internet?

Social media is a wonderful tool for businesses. In fact, in today’s Internet-reliant society, it is quickly becoming a necessity.

LinkedIn is touted as the “World’s Largest Professional Network.” A far cry from more personal social media sites like Facebook and Twitter, LinkedIn keeps the emphasis on people’s employment and their professional connections. Consider it like a networking event, only online. Unlike in-person networking, though, LinkedIn enables people to make connections with anyone, anywhere.

Employers have a variety of reasons for using employee photos, including:

We’ve all seen them.  Anonymous spewing hate-filled, defamatory statements on Facebook and Twitter, as well as in the comment pages of news stories on both local and national news.  The commenters have a certain entertainment value, until you or your business are in their sights.  So what do you do?  The answer is not always so simple, especially when you don’t even know who is speaking.