{"id":1457,"date":"2023-04-26T09:08:46","date_gmt":"2023-04-26T14:08:46","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/agri-search.com\/?p=1457"},"modified":"2023-04-26T09:08:46","modified_gmt":"2023-04-26T14:08:46","slug":"the-culpability-of-free-speech","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/agri-search.com\/the-culpability-of-free-speech\/","title":{"rendered":"The Culpability of Free Speech"},"content":{"rendered":"

The more things change, the more they stay the same.\u201d\u00a0\u2013\u00a0 \u00a0Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr<\/em><\/p>\n

In the past five years, much has changed.\u00a0 In 2018, Facebook had over 2.23 billion monthly average users (MAU) compared to 2.96 billion in 2022. \u00a0Twitter reported growth from 298 million MAU in 2018 to 368 million in 2022.\u00a0 TikTok catapulted from 271 million MAU in 2018 to over 1 billion MAU in 2022.<\/p>\n

What\u2019s stayed the same?\u00a0 No matter the medium, we have always had the right to free speech, but never has the freedom of opinion been accessible to so many. \u00a0But what happens when instead of judging, we end up being judged?<\/p>\n

If you had to pinpoint a turning point, it was perhaps the launch of CNN in June of 1980. \u00a0Prior to CNN, news programming delivered relatively factual information for an hour or two a day. After CNN, although it was an amazing accomplishment to cover events live as they happened and to have an endless stream of information, it created a demand for opinion. \u00a0How else would you fill 24 hours of news for 365 days per year?<\/p>\n

A decade later, the abundance of accessibility for opinions skyrocketed with the growth of easy-to-use Web browsers in the mid-1990s. \u00a0As of 2018, Facebook had over 2.23 billion monthly active users \u2013 all voicing their opinions.<\/p>\n

We have always had the right to free speech, but never before has the freedom of opinion been accessible to so many.<\/p>\n

As an employer, what is your culpability for the free opinions of your employees?<\/p>\n

The Issue<\/strong><\/p>\n

Most hiring managers are quite savvy when it comes to researching potential new hires; they check out pictures on social media, they judge extracurricular activities, and they may even choose to end the interviewing process based on things discovered online.<\/p>\n

What happens when instead of judging, we end up being judged?<\/p>\n

Consider the ramifications of an A-Player researching whether or not to interview with your organization, and seeing what to them is a controversial article shared from an employee within the firm. \u00a0Consider one of your key accounts, someone who has done business with your organization for years, distancing themselves based on a persistent string of what they perceive to be annoying comments online. \u00a0This is not limited purely to social media; consider the consequences of a potential client reviewing your firm, and viewing information on your website that makes them feel like their business may not be welcome at your firm because of differing beliefs.<\/p>\n

Now, go back and re-read the prior paragraph.\u00a0 Notice the following:<\/p>\n