How Your Employee's Twitter Posts Can Ruin Your Business.

The other day I received an invitation to partake of dowloading a MessageLabs whitepaper, the email titled as above, promising to uncover the business issues associated with web (mis) use in the workplace". Lucky me, it was part of an IT Compliance Bulletin and also included the tempting "Free 10-page Guide to Achieving ISO 27001 Certification", "Dangerous Things You Didn't Know About Outbound Emails" (and I don't think they just mean the ones you send to ex-boyfriends after a few glasses of wine and get yourself in a 'situation') and - my personal favourite - "A Masterclass In Threat Detection And Prevention!". I haven't read any of them yet. In fact, I've only just downloaded the first one, "Is Social Networking Really Bad For Business?". So, anyway, can employee's Twitter posts really ruin your business? The same, or even more so than, say, posting semi-clad photos of themselves on Facebook, or slagging you off down the pub to all and sundry, or taking out an advert in The Times to let middle England read all about it? Are they even talking about the posts in a content way, or do they mean the time spent posting rather than working? I'd rather the more scandalous and salacious reasons, such as posting photos of you in bed with the MD, for example. I am prepared to be disappointed though. So how DOES the evil Twitter go about destroying businesses and lives? The mind boggles. But let it boggle no more, dear reader - because I am happy to share with you the secrets of the MessageLabs report. It's probably stuff we all know anyway. We can read through it together. Let's start on Page 1, shall we?

It all seems to stem from the changed nature of internet use in the workplace, put in motion by those pesky young Generation Y-ers. Rather than just using t'interweb for emails, research and buying shoes in the Brand Alley sale in your lunch hour, you can now have a chat with your mates, upload photos from your mobile phone, share a video or song, and update your relationship status. All in the space it takes your colleague to make a cup of tea ready and bring in the digestives. With Facebook growing 228% in the 12 months since Feb 2008, and Twitter a massive 1382%, it doesn't take a mathematical genius to work out that there must be a hell of a lot of people using these social networking sites whilst on the clock. Next up is the blending of work and personal life, with people expecting to be able to access the internet for personal use whilst at work, for various reasons. Gambling, checking personal emails (Hotmail, Yahoo! etc), downloading music and so on. Over two thirds of online porn traffic occurs during office hours, according to http://www.getsafeonline.org/. And of course, Tweeting and sheep throwing are also very popular. Hearteningly, some of us are good little boys and girls and use the net to download work relevant software, and are harnessing social networking sites for the good - to build contacts for networking, lead generation and to keep up with industry developments. We are known as "committed employees", don't you know. Blogs and forums are now used as important business tools, especially for marketing or recruitment led companies.

So what's the problem? Well, apparently there are web risks to business. Duh, like we didn't already know that. Everyone knows that. So are MessageLabs telling us anything new? The first consideration is of direct, measurable costs. Reduced productivity and wasted bandwidth are cited as examples of this. Security is an issue - malicious websites, accidental loss of data and new threats from cybercriminals. Legal compliance is also a problem, as are employee/HR issues and unauthorised software downloads. All these can lead to businesses being sued, fined and generally getting into lots of trouble. Right down at the bottom of the pile is brand and reputation risk. Personally, I think that this last one is the largest issue for any SME, who rely more heavily on word of mouth than larger companies who can exercise damage control in most cases should their reputation be threatened. Most companies already have a AUP - Acceptable Use Policy - in place to minimise these risks. If yours hasn't, then as an owner/boss, get one - as an employee, enjoy surfing while you can!

Interesting stuff, if not exactly groundbreaking. Yes, it's obvious we shouldn't post confidential documents or information pertaining to work on Facebook. Or look at porn, or Tweet and blog when were are pretending to be typing up the minutes of last week's AGM. But whilst the report concentrates the obviously quantifiable risks to business, especially security (not surprisingly, being produced by MessageLabs, Symantec Hosted Services TM) it doesn't mention any of the sorts of things that people do on social networking sites that could affect the reputation/brand adversely.
Things like writing on your friend's wall about how much you hate your job and boss, using four letter words exclusively. Things like slagging off a client and naming them. Things like posting dirty pictures of yourself on your Facebook page and inviting professional contacts to look. Maybe stuff like generally being foul mouthed and chavvy when you post on Twitter, or updating your Facebook status every time you get drunk, dumped, or laid. In themselves, all these things could be seen as pretty harmless (except the dirty pics one... unless you know that your contacts will be happy to see you in a PVC nurse's uniform and won't mention it to your boss). Unfortunately, all these things are probably an extremely stupid idea if you have lots of colleagues following you on Twitter or as Facebook friends, and a bloody ridiculous idea if you actually have your boss/manager/HR director etc as a contact able to access everything you write or upload.

You know what? I don't think your employee's Twitter posts CAN ruin your business. If you run the company properly, and treat people well, they won't need to write nasty things about you. If they are fulfilled and interested in their jobs, they won't have to spend all day Tweeting for something to do. And, at the end of the day, you're responsible for the hiring (even if indirectly) of your staff... so if they end up twisting the internet to use it for pure evil, then you need to ask yourself how they ever got through the first stage interview.

Mind you, when I got my job I hadn't even heard of Twitter, so my poor boss never stood a chance...

For more free whitepapers on web security and the like, see www.messagelabs.co.uk

Game, Sir? No, Sir - that's a bar chart, Sir...

Bored at work? Addicted to computer games? Fed up of jumping guiltily every time your boss walks into the room and having to hastily shut down your game window so you don't get caught out? Me too. If Big Fish Games had never been invented, I would be much more productive. I hear there are some people who truly love their work and would never find it tedious, but suspect these are a) dull as dishwater, b) exceptionally overpaid or c) lying. Or all three. Although I would have thought that b) precludes a), but what do I know about the world of work? Not too much, as it happens, although I try to get at least some of it done in between hidden object games, Prison Break marathons and street dance (yes, really ... although an accurate description would involve adding the word "pitiful" somewhere, as opposed to dance). Anyway, all is not lost, fellow lazies - for some marvellous chaps at CantYouSeeImBusy.com have solved our problem with a cunning plan. They have created games, inspired by old style arcade games that many of us grew up with such as Breakout and Tetris. Fine, I hear you say - but what's so interesting about that? Well, you may like this, workshy ones - all the games are disguised as Excel and Word documents so your boss will never find out! These games follow the general gist of the classics they copy, just played against what look like genuine office applications. Tidy. In Leadership, you have to direct a spaceship between two lines of a graph and Breakdown (based on the wonderful Atari Breakout) sees the player having to hit lines of text to make them disappear, rather than the original bricks. According to the Dutch developers' website, "all the games at CantYouSeeImBusy.com are designed in a way that nobody can see that you’re gaming. In fact, your boss and colleagues will think that you’re working harder than ever before." Hmmm. I can see two major flaws there. Firstly, that the games sound less than inspiring, and secondly, most bosses would be suspicious if a previously lackadaisical employee suddenly stopped surfing OnlineGames.net and started gazing intently at pie charts. Especially when their job role doesn't even involve pie charts. And the conscientious part of me feels that it's a bit, well, irresponsible to encourage people to play computer games when they are being paid to work, even if it is all intended as a bit of fun and they would do it anyway. Maybe I am just an old stick in the mud. Well, we can't all be perfect.

In defiance of being made to feel like a naughty schoolgirl, I prefer to opt for the good old-fashioned work avoidance techniques - day dreaming, copious note taking/ internet research (hey, why do you think I like to blog?!), toilet trips, cigarette breaks, offering to do the coffee run etc - personally. And if that doesn't work, then never fear. Just swap desks so you face your boss, look engrossed, quizzical, thoughtful and serious at appropriate/ equal intervals, and keep your Big Fish pop-up window open. After all, if it's good enough for me...

For the hidden games, see www.CantYouSeeImBusy.com

For hidden object games, see www.bigfishgames.com

Can you Recogniz(r) the danger?

Last month, Swedish android developers The Amazing Tribe (or TAT, to those in the know), displayed a controversial new mobile application at the Mobile World Congress. If you haven't heard all about Recognizr by now, then you must either be over 70 or have been taking part in David Mitchell's "interesting" BBC2 show The Bubble. Long story short, Recognizr - not a typo - is an "augmented reality application" (TAT), which you chuck on your mobile phone. Just use the camera to take a picture of anyone you see who looks familiar/ interesting/ attractive etc, and lo and behold, Recognizr allows you to find them on Facebook or Twitter and read all about them. TAT claim that this application will improve the social networking experience of those people to whom social networking is an essential part of their life (saddos, teenagers, and stalkers spring to mind). Talking of the latter, The Sun was quick to publish an article branding the Recognizr application as a "stalker's dream", in their typical tabloid scaremongering style. Their trademark layout saw an article emblazoned with heavily bolded words to ram home the point that BURGLARS, BLACKMAILERS and PERVERTS would take no time at all to turn the application to heinous use. Well, I say. According to The Sun's talent-free Richard Moriarty, security "experts" say that burglars will be able to take pictures of people on a night out and then find out their addresses in order to rob them, anyone "fooling around" on a night out would be vulnerable to blackmail (what "fooling about" entails is anyone's guess, but based on the average standard of The Sun's readership, probably sleeping with your fiancee's sister, in which case you deserve to be blackmailed) and women would be stalked by perverts. Nothing new there then.

The Astonishing Tribe are quick to point out that any fears for safety are completely unfounded. They say that the application can only be fully utilised if both parties have signed up for it, that privacy levels (similar to those on Facebook) can be set up, and that this will avoid security violations. It sounds like Recognizr is intended to be used like Facebook - to allow friends to keep in touch and share photographs and updates. If what TAT say is true, then yes, any pervert can take my pic in a crowded bar, but unless I have activated my usage of Recognizr, then their scary and filthy attempts to hunt me down will be fruitless. And let's face it, any would-be stalker or rapist is perfectly capable of taking a secret snap and then following me home the good old-fashioned way.

More to the point, why is this application so threatening to people? I'll tell you for why - because they have openly posted personal details such as addresses, emails, contact numbers and photographs of themselves on the internet. Facebook, as far as I'm aware, works by allowing people to choose privacy settings, and in this way only accepted contacts can view any personal information. Anyone can take a picture of anyone else in the street and try to track them down via Recognizr, but surely would only be successful if the photographee a) also used the application, b) had their picture on Facebook and c) also listed their name and address on their Facebook page. If someone you don't know takes a shine to your Facebook photo (which is always much better than the reality anyway) and asks to be your "friend", then you can always say no if you think they might be a dodgy pervert/ stalker/ burglar. It is your responsibility to keep yourself safe on social networks, after all.

But, adding fuel to the Facebook fire comes the reports about the sentencing yesterday of Peter Chapman, who posed as a teenager on the site in order to kidnap, rape and murder his 17 year old victim. A convicted sex offender, he used Facebook as a means to meet young girls, and managed to befriend, groom and lure Ashleigh Hall to her death. The Merseyside Police have been heavily criticised for losing touch of Chapman for almost 9 months before deciding to issue a nationwide search for him prior to Ashleigh's murder, but the real issue being debated in the case is the safety of Facebook for children and teenagers. Although releasing a statement warning people not to meet up with online contacts as they may have nefarious intentions, they have been lambasted by the police for their refusal to sign up to a "panic button" scheme designed to protect children from paedophiles. Bebo and MSN have adopted the Ceop (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Unit) scheme, which is used to build intelligence reports of likely suspects which become part of police investigations. Any young person who is worried that they are being contacted or groomed by a paedophile can press this button and report the activity directly to Ceop. Last year 267 reports of suspicious activity on Facebook were made, and 43% of these were in regards to suspected grooming. Worryingly, though, 81% of those worried were forced to access other sites in order to contact Ceops, because they had no way to do so via Facebook. 334 arrests were made last year following these reports. It is frightening to think of children or young people being targetted by paedophiles on social networking sites, and especially for those parents whose children, like Ashleigh, are old enough to go out on their own. I can't help thinking, though, just how useful the panic button alone would be. Sure, if you have a child savvy enough to spot a possible danger, or you yourself are suspicious, then yes - it would be effective. But if, say, you have a teenage daughter who meets someone she believes to be a young man, and they exchange joking and flirting emails, and photographs and then he asks to meet - how do you monitor this? She has had no reason to suspect anything, and no report will have been generated. She probably won't even tell her parents that she is off to meet some lad off the internet - after all, they will just go mad and tell her he is an old pervert, and she knows he is her soulmate - so she says she's going to her mate's house. It's sad but true that, as long as there are paedophiles and sexual predators out there, they will use any method they can to access and abuse their victims. The internet is just one way and, unfortunately, makes their job a bit easier.

So, whether you are scared rigid by The Sun's completely unbiased report on the Recognizr app or love the idea, can't imagine life without Facebook, or worry endlessly about who your kids are chatting to on all these new fangled social networking sites, you don't need to be a victim. Personally, I don't use Facebook. I used to, but now I don't, and never will. I just don't like it. For that reason I am not worried at all about this Recognizr thingymijob, or getting myself an online stalker. I don't allow my 12 year old to Facebook - if he wants to chat with his mates, there's a phone for that. Or - and this is a novel idea in our modern world - he can invite them over for tea. It makes me feel secure, and it's one less thing to worry about. For people who do like Facebook (my partner, bless him, is one of these) and see it as a valuable way to keep up with friends and family, then just watch your backs and all will be fine.

Or you could always start a Facebook campaign to ban Facebook, I suppose. Power to the people, not the perverts.