Telegram no data The potential for computer networking to facilitate newly improved forms of computer-mediated social interaction was suggested early on. Many of these early communities focused on bringing people together to interact with each other through chat rooms, and encouraged users to share personal information and ideas via personal webpages by providing easy-to-use publishing tools and free or inexpensive webspace.
November 17, ISSUES Whether a judge may post comments and other material on the judge's page on a social networking site, if the publication of such material does not otherwise violate the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Whether a judge may add lawyers who may appear before the judge as "friends" on a social networking site, and permit such lawyers to add the judge as their "friend.
Whether a committee of responsible persons, which is conducting an election campaign on behalf of a judge's candidacy, may post material on the committee's page on a social networking site, if the publication of the material does not otherwise violate the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Whether a committee of responsible persons, which is conducting an election campaign on behalf of a judge's candidacy, may establish a social networking page which has an option for persons, including lawyers who may appear before the judge, to list themselves as "fans" or supporters of the judge's candidacy, so long as the judge or committee does not control who is permitted to list himself or herself as a supporter.
First, the site can be used by the member simply to post pictures, comments, and other material that visitors to the site can view. When used simply to post materials, social networking sites are Ban social networking to an internet webpage where information is posted and made accessible for the public to view.
Your friends on Facebook are the same friends, acquaintances and family members that you communicate with in the real world. We built Facebook to make it easy to share information with your friends and people around you. We understand you may not want everyone in the world to have the information you share on Facebook; that is why we give you control of your information.
Our default privacy settings limit the information displayed in your profile to your networks and other reasonable community limitations that we tell you about. Facebook is about sharing information with others — friends and people in your networks — while providing you with privacy settings that restrict other users from accessing your information.
We allow you to choose the information you provide to friends and networks through Facebook. Our network architecture and your privacy settings allow you to make informed choices about who has access to your information. However, as the practice exists on Facebook, the campaign is not required to accept or reject a "fan" in order for their name to appear on the campaign's Facebook page.
Anyone desiring to be listed as a "fan" may do so unilaterally, without the campaign's knowledge or consent. The Code of Judicial Conduct does not address or restrict a judge's or campaign committee's method of communication but rather addresses its substance.
Therefore, this proposed conduct, whether by the judge or the campaign committee, does not violate the Code of Judicial Conduct. Of course, the substance of what is posted may constitute a violation. The Committee has previously concluded that campaign committees may establish websites for otherwise permitted campaign purposes.
To the extent that such identification is available for any other person to view, the Committee concludes that this practice would violate Canon 2B. First, the judge must establish the social networking page. It is this selection and communication process, the Committee believes, that violates Canon 2B, because the judge, by so doing, conveys or permits others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.
Thus, the Commentary to Canon 2A states: A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny.
A judge must therefore accept restrictions on the judge's conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. Extrajudicial Activities in General.
A judge shall conduct all of the judge's extra-judicial activities so that they do not: The Committee concludes that such identification in a public forum of a lawyer who may appear before the judge does convey this impression and therefore is not permitted.
The Committee notes, in coming to this conclusion, that social networking sites are broadly available for viewing on the internet. Thus, it is clear that many persons viewing the site will not be judges and will not be familiar with the Code, its recusal provisions, and other requirements which seek to assure the judge's impartiality.
However, the test for Canon 2B is not whether the judge intends to convey the impression that another person is in a position to influence the judge, but rather whether the message conveyed to others, as viewed by the recipient, conveys the impression that someone is in a special position to influence the judge.
Viewed in this way, the Committee concludes that identifying lawyers who may appear before a judge as "friends" on a social networking site, if that relationship is disclosed to anyone other than the judge by virtue of the information being available for viewing on the internet, violates Canon 2 B.
This opinion should not be interpreted to mean that the inquiring judge is prohibited from identifying any person as a "friend" on a social networking site.
Instead, it is limited to the facts presented by the inquiring judge, related to lawyers who may appear before the judge.
The minority believes that the listing of lawyers who may appear before the judge as "friends" on a judge's social networking page does not reasonably convey to others the impression that these lawyers are in a special position to influence the judge.
The minority concludes that social networking sites have become so ubiquitous that the term "friend" on these pages does not convey the same meaning that it did in the pre-internet age; that today, the term "friend" on social networking sites merely conveys the message that a person so identified is a contact or acquaintance; and that such an identification does not convey that a person is a "friend" in the traditional sense, i.
In this sense, the minority concludes that identification of a lawyer who may appear before a judge as a "friend" on a social networking site does not convey the impression that the person is in a position to influence the judge and does not violate Canon 2B.
The question then remains whether a campaign committee may establish a social networking page which allows lawyers who may practice before the judge to designate themselves as "fans" or supporters of the judge's candidacy.Twitter is in trouble with its users after announcing that it banned advertising from all accounts belonging to Sputnik and RT.
People flooded to the social networking service's official account to lambast it for forgetting the definition of freedom of speech. The latest social media ban, which is starting to be lifted, was put in place after a Marxist terrorist organization that held hostage a state prosecutor started to distribute images of .
Jun 19, · In , Lester Packingham became a convicted sex offender at the age of 21, after he pleaded guilty to taking indecent liberties with a child – having . Banning Social Networks a Losing Battle IT executives also acknowledge you can never truly ban social networks.
have taken some creative approaches to dealing with social networking. FLORIDA SUPREME COURT. Judicial Ethics Advisory Committee. Opinion Number: Date of Issue: November 17, ISSUES. Whether a judge may post comments and other material on the judge's page on a social networking site, if the publication of such material does not otherwise violate the Code of Judicial Conduct.
4 EFFECTS OF SOCIAL MEDIA ON COLLEGE STUDENTS Statement of Problem To address the issue of the effectiveness of using social networking, the first.