Every human being struggles with what’s right and what’s wrong; What’s considered bad versus evil and what’s positive versus negative behavior.  Making unethical decisions whether it’s in our personal or professional life will always be a struggle for mankind. The advancement in technology and the use of social media, doesn’t make these decisions any easier to deal with due to the care free nature it gives us to express ourselves openly without judgment. However, the use of social media in criminal justice organizations has caused a significant amount of conflict issues with working relationships and personal relationships with coworkers and loved ones.  Ethical dilemmas in criminal justice organizations stems from employees’ actions on and off duty while using social media which can have a major impact on their professional careers. The most popular social sites that employees find themselves making unethical decisions are on Facebook and Twitter.

Social media sites like Facebook and Twitter were created for people to connect with their friends and family and to express themselves freely. One topic of discussion that is addressed during meetings with the Probation Department during unit meetings, is the high number of unethical behavior that is seen on Facebook. Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, initially created Facebook for college students to communicate with each other from different schools however, the site has expanded and grown for anyone to create an account and explore Facebook to connect with their family and friends . One unique feature of Facebook is that you can “like” just about anything from pictures to statuses, or comments. This popular feature seems harmless and innocent but it has caused a lot of criminal justice employees to be caught in ethical dilemmas that catches the attention of employers especially when someone “likes” negative comments or pictures about the organization or its members , express political views or agendas. Another unique feature of Facebook is that you can either set your profile page to “public”, which means anyone user can view your page or secured it with the “friends only” setting with blocks anyone who is not your friend from viewing your profile(Crtalic, et.al, 2015). Being that most users do not use the “friends only” security setting,  this too has cause negative backlash amongst criminal justice employees because anyone is allowed to see what you post whether its something positive or negative . In the articled by G. A., & Ussery, B. C. (2012), an professor at Bowling Green State University expresses “there is no longer really a boundary between off-campus and on-campus, or personal and professional — all because of Facebook”. This statement justifies that Facebook has blurred boundary lines of professional and personal ethics since users operate it publicly for everyone to see and because of this, any posting, picture or comment that is shared or “liked” is subject for employers to see and critic. Such actions can lead to disciplinary actions such as write ups or coachings or worse, termination of employment.

In the court case, Bland v. Roberts, six employees of a sheriff’s office in Virginia were allegedly fired because of their support of the Sheriff’s opponent in the election. Two of the discharged employees simply “liked” the Facebook page of the political opponent prior to the election” (Marcum, T. M., J.D., & Perry, S. J., J.D. (2014). This type of ethical dilemma is happening more often to government employees who use social media to express freedom of speech, and some actions performed by government employees are deemed unacceptable behavior by most government agencies policy on the use of social media especially if it makes the organization gain negative attention that could hurt productivity.

As American citizens, we all value privacy and the right to have freedom of speech to express how we feel. However, in the workforce, this constitutional right is asked to be used discreetly to protect the reputation of the organization from public backlash and in some ways, to protect the employee from being judged or discipline for unethical behavior by their employer.  Marcum, T. M., J.D., & Perry, S. J., J.D., (2014) points out, “When a citizen accepts employment in the government sector, that citizen may experience, due to governmental necessity, certain limitations on his or her free speech rights” (pg.5).  In particular, The North Carolina Department of Public Safety Social Media Policy states “NCDPS recognizes that its employees may use social media on a personal basis outside of their professional activities and that such use may include the right to exercise freedom of speech. However, NCDPS encourages its employees to use good judgment when posting to a social media site as a private citizen, especially if the employee refers to anything related to NCDPS business” (North Carolina Department of Public Safety, Social Media (2013).

From an individual perspective, most government employees disagree with their organization trying to limit their First Amendment right to express their personal opinions especially on the worldwide internet that organizations have no legal rights to or control over.  On the contrary, management may look at government employee’s actions on social media from a utilitarian theory approach.  Sharp, B. S., Aguirre, G., Kickham, A. K. (2013) states “the utilitarian theory (teleological ethics) holds that acts are judged to be morally right or wrong not in and of themselves, but rather by the results that follow from the acts. Therefore, no act is in and of itself right or wrong” (pg. 6).  Most government agencies are reactive organizations, meaning they only react to certain situations when something bad happens. For example, A probation officer informed an offender via Facebook that the FBI is looking for them. As a public safety officer, it is against policy to inform offenders of confidential information that has not been served by a law enforcement officer. The offender gets pulled over for a routine traffic stop thinking it’s the FBI that’s after hi and leads the police officer on a high-speed chase. The high-speed chase makes national news and the offender kills an innocent bystander during the chase. The offender is apprehended and during interrogation, the offender tells the police officer he was warned by his probation officer that he had a warrant and that he refused to go back to jail. The probation officer is fired for the improper use of social media and breaking policy and procedure of the department.  If the offender hadn’t caused national media attention and killed someone, the department would have never acted on firing the probation officer for warning the offender about an unserved warrant or misuse use of the social media policy. Bratton, D., & Candy, V. (2013) even argues that “the potential for conflict between organization and individual goals seems inevitable when making social media accessible in the workplace”.  This is a clear example on how social media impacts employees’ professional careers and the conflict it causes between employee and management.

The use of social media to communicate with offenders/clients raises another concern when discussing ethical decision making. Some public safety officers may feel it is ok to accept ‘friend request from clients they work with to keep tabs on them. Voshel, E. H., & Wesala, A. (2015) points out however, that workers “might not take time to consider the ethical complications that might follow and being friends with a client on Facebook, in addition to being a dual relationship, presents additional ethical concerns such as conflict of interest and potential confidentiality/privacy violations” (pg71). This is prevalent in the example given about the Probation Officer disclosing confidential information to an offender via social media.

Literature Review

The following literature reviews will focus on professions in  the criminal justice sector ranging from lawyers and social workers to other workforce professions to analyze the impact social media has on employees making unethical decisions on and off duty while also analyzing the differences and similarities of each party involved and what steps were taken to resolve ethical dilemmas.

Privacy and Boundaries

In a research article by Kasten (2011), he examines lawyers and professional ethics on Social Media. He points out that attorney professional ethics applies not only to social media but all aspects of their daily duties when using the internet. Lawyers are asked to proceed with caution when using social media for professional and personal use because it can interfere with court cases and may even discredit evidence in court which can tarnish a lawyer’s reputation. The article points out that the Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct has implemented social media laws to help address appropriate and inappropriate behavior on social media however attorneys still find themselves caught in ethical dilemmas when using social media that question confidentiality, risk of unintended conflict and evasion of privacy for lawyers and their clients. The author goes on to state that while using social media, it is unlikely to have any form of privacy due because the web is not owned by anyone so all things posted is unprotected by law.

Similarity, Crtalic, A. K., Gibbs, R. L., Sprong, M. E., & Dell, T. F. (2015) article, emphasize that “The increase in social networking media, on line and distance counseling, and the ubiquitous use of laptops, hand-held devices, and internet connected devices at home and in work settings have resulted in the need for ethical standards to help guide rehabilitation professionals in service delivery. The purpose of this manuscript is to address potential issues that can arise in interacting with clients through social media” (pg.44). The article addresses 7 different topics of discussions however the ones related to this review addresses disadvantages of social media, the use of social media professionally, privately or not at all and implementing a social media policy to address boundaries with clients (Crtalic, et al.,2015). One disadvantage discussed was the use of social media by users and how counselors need to educated themselves on social media privacy settings to reduce the risk of breeches in privacy. Another disadvantage of social media usage was being deceived by other users may portray themselves as someone else besides your client. As Crtalic, et al (2015) states, “non-verbal communication is often lost in an on-line platform and may lead to conflict in the counseling relationship and that the issue of maintaining professional boundaries is perhaps one of the most difficult to navigate, and can lead to potential ethical dilemmas” (pg.44). Given these points, the literature points out that there isn’t a policy in place that specifically address ethical standards and the use of social media for counselors especially the use of social media social sites like Facebook, Link In, and Twitter professionally and personally.  To help address ethical dilemmas, the article concludes that ethical dilemmas can be avoided if specific social media policies are in place.

Additionally, Acquisti, A., Brandimarte, L. & Loewenstein, G. 2015,  article “identified three processes which, they expressed influence human behavior in relation to privacy concerns: 1. Uncertainty or ignorance about the consequences of crossing the boundaries between the private and public spheres of life; 2. Context-dependency, which may vary by situation, be learned over time, be moderated by cultural norms and values, and swayed by an illusion of anonymity; 3. The degree of malleability and influence, eg. the capture and use (manipulation) of personal data for commercial and political purposes”. Through research, the article argues that people are unaware of the things they share on line, the consequences of personal information being shared online and how personal information is shared through various sites like Facebook making privacy concerns an ongoing dilemma in society.  Acquisti et al. (2015) “the boundaries between public and private become less defined’ and the capacity of people to meet expectations concerning privacy ‘more difficult and consequential” (as cited in Johnstone, M, 2016). Acquisti et al., (2015). Points out “the empirical research on privacy reviewed suggested that social media policies that rely exclusively on informing or “empowering” the individual are unlikely to provide adequate protection against the risks posed by recent information technologies”.

Legal Issues and Social Media

In like manner, in Hearing, G. A., & Ussery, B. C. (2012) article on social media and the workplace, it addressed different court cases on how social media has caused problems for both employees and employers on and off duty. Also, as stated in the article, the use of social media and technology not only impacts every aspect of our lives but has caused numerous legal issues for employers. Employees are now taking to social media to address work related issues but are finding themselves in a world of trouble for certain things that are expressed on social media. Hearing, G. A., & Ussery, B. C. (2012), talk about a case were a company “fired an employee for posting critical comments about her supervisor on her personal Facebook page” something that most organization highly discouraged their employees to do in their social media policy.

Comparatively, the article also touches bases on civil rights and first amendment cases involved in misuse of social media in the workforce.  A female worker sued the City of Savannah under 42 U.S.C. §1983 and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, alleging that the city subjected her to gender discrimination and retaliation through the enforcement of its workplace policies in the context of her social networking activity. She argued that her former employer was liable for the Facebook comment because it allowed employees to post comments and photos on social networking sites during company time and for company purposes (He