Should employers screen job candidates' social media before hiring?

Bre (No)

Browsing a person’s online existence to determine their value as an employee is senseless. It invades applicant privacy by evaluating after-hours behaviors, contributes to the widespread acceptance of excessive personal scrutiny, and opens candidates up to an unchecked and unlimited world of subconscious biases and unethical discrimination based on race, gender, age, orientation, appearance, and more.

Online presence is extremely subjective and irrelevant to job performance. Seriously assessing an online personal profile means assuming and accepting that it provides an accurate portrayal when the opposite is often true. The internet is widely unregulated, and profiles are subject to imitation and hacking. Some users may have been victims of cyberbullying, which falsely defamed their character online, while others pay top dollar to have their profiles professionally and unauthentically curated.

Although social media use is more popular than ever, people who abstain from using such systems remain a part of the workforce. And according to psychologists, individuals with more or less associated information are known to be respectively advantaged or disadvantaged for selection. As a result, when companies review social media for employment, those with less or no information online are unfairly affected.

Considering former President Donald Trump’s notorious social media persona and the example it sets for future generations, it’s unrealistic and misguided to expect members of the workforce to present themselves professionally on social media at all times. If even the US government isn’t punitive based on the social media conduct of high-ranking officials, employers have no right to be overly punitive regarding applicants.

Elliot (Yes)

Employers have every right to screen candidates' social media accounts before hiring. Firstly, nothing is legally stopping them from doing this. When someone decides to create a public account with their real name, they should realize that anyone can access it anytime--including potential future employers--because it is a public record. The government, therefore, can't create legislation or regulations to ban employers from doing this.

However, the argument goes beyond public record and into an ethical domain. If a potential employee had posted racist or misogynist content or pictures of themselves posing with firearms, implying that they would not hesitate to use them, wouldn't employers be morally obligated to avoid hiring this person? Employers must prevent dangerous people from entering the workplace in order to protect their current employees from potential harm or a toxic job environment.

Finally, it's important to understand that many professionals rely on their social media accounts to promote their self-image. In other words, they want potential employers to view their social media accounts, and they see them almost like online resumes. This is especially true with certain professions, such as real estate agents, actors, models, and social media managers. 

Checking a candidate's social media helps employers avoid wasting time, as they can be sure that the potential hires have matching values and culture. Remember that the employee is likely to continue posting the same content after being hired, making it even more critical that they match the company's standards, as they are representing the business online.