• Home
  • News
  • BigLaw Associate ‘Googles’ Everyone Before Presenting Job Candidates to Firm #ABAChicago

Careers

BigLaw Associate ‘Googles’ Everyone Before Presenting Job Candidates to Firm #ABAChicago

Posted Aug 1, 2009 2:43 PM CST
By Stephanie Francis Ward

image

McCoy, Stell, Meyer, and Choe. Photo by REP3

Lawyers, even the infamous ones, are quasi public figures, and they should make online posts accordingly, said a panel of lawyers Saturday.

Indeed, Michele On-Ja Choe, a Sidley Austin associate who was part of the panel, says that when she interviews law students during on-campus interviewing, she Googles everyone before presenting candidates to her firm.

"This is my judgment; I take it seriously," says Choe, who spoke at "What (Not) to Post!" a Saturday event sponsored by the ABA Commission on Racial & Ethnic Diversity in the Profession.

Indeed, most large law firms now research summer associate candidates online, says Kathryn Stell, a Chicago sole practitioner on the ABA Annual Meeting panel. Previously, she was the diversity director at Sidley Austin.

"People have been allowed to develop a habit of posting things, and they have to think about what they're getting into," she says. "It's hard to get much more conservative, in the social sense of the word, than a large law firm."

As for Choe, photos of a job prospect drinking don't bother her, for the most part.

"What's gotten people totally knocked out of the running is extensive blogs talking about drug use, or blackouts," she says. "You've just got to get that kind of stuff down."

So how does one get objectionable content removed?

Talk to the site administrator, and actively monitor online presence with tools such as Google alerts says Stuart Meyer, founder and chief media strategist of Social Frequency Media Communications. The Chicago company helps organizations build their social media presence.

"If you think it's bad now, this is one of the most game-changing pieces of technology, said Meyer, pulling out the new iPhone 3GS. "I could actually speak on here, push a button, and I've just posted to Twitter and Facebook," he said.

And don't be afraid to have conversations with those who post images or content that you're not comfortable with, noted Jamenda A. McCoy, a Kirkland & Ellis associate who moderated the event. She mentioned that her father had posted photos of her and her children, and a pro bono criminal defense client came across his website.

"Please don't post pictures of me unless you ask me," she says. "I want to control what's up about me and my family, and I should have the right to do that."

Ages of the audience varied. Younger members wanted to know what to do about inappropriate photos that friends posted on MySpace, while some older lawyers were curious who owned the photos' copyrights.

More on the Annual Meeting '09 here:

Why is #ABAChicago in our Annual Meeting headlines? Check out our hashtags post: "ABA Annual Meeting 2009 on Twitter"

ABA Journal's Annual Meeting coverage at this link.

Flickr Slideshow: ABA Journal snapshots from Annual Meeting.

ABA Annual Meeting site.

Interactive updates on the Annual Meeting from ABA Media Relations at ABANow.org.

Comments

1.

B. McLeod
Aug 1, 2009 5:49 PM CST

I think general, preemployment spying does carry a downside too.  Suppose a candidate has been the topic of a news article on a health condition, a personal bankruptcy, or a discrimination complaint they litigated against another employer.  Researching candidates on the internet, a prospective employer opens itself up to complaints that it discriminated in hiring on the basis of information it would never have obtained in a structured interview, limited to permissible questions.

Flag this comment

2.

James
Aug 1, 2009 9:50 PM CST

Spying?  How is it spying to read something that is publicly available?  However, I do see your point regarding impermissible information being posted on the internet.  Still gotta prove that that was the motivating factor and I don’t see juries making that big of a stretch.

Flag this comment

3.

B. McLeod
Aug 1, 2009 11:51 PM CST

Carefully crafted hiring procedures, case never gets to a jury.  BigLaw moron searching the internet, case does.

I agree with you that we should trust juries to make correct decisions.  I can tell you with confidence that large firms advise their clients to the contrary, and regard a jury trial as one of the greatest risks imaginable.

Flag this comment

4.

J.D.
Aug 3, 2009 9:37 AM CST

I guess it’s better than “Binging” them.

Flag this comment

5.

mac
Aug 3, 2009 9:54 AM CST

Perhaps that’s why I can’t find a job. Someone else has my name, and as far as I can tell he was a computer hacker, which is a problem because I used to work in IT before becoming a lawyer. He doesn’t show up at the top of the google search, but he shows up about 5 items down and then its all him.

Flag this comment

6.

J.D.
Aug 3, 2009 1:03 PM CST

I thought macs were supposed to be more secure than PCs.

Flag this comment

7.

Dave
Aug 7, 2009 6:01 AM CST

“‘What’s gotten people totally knocked out of the running is extensive blogs talking about drug use, or blackouts,’ she says. ‘You’ve just got to get that kind of stuff down.’”

Heck no, don’t take that stuff down, leave it up so we know whether or not to hire you.  If you’re serious about not screwing up your job prospects DON’T DO THAT STUFF IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Flag this comment

8.

CM
Aug 7, 2009 6:45 AM CST

What Dave said.

Flag this comment

9.

flalaw2003
Aug 7, 2009 8:42 AM CST

Yeah. What Dave said.

Flag this comment

10.

BJM
Aug 7, 2009 8:50 AM CST

1. Well, duh, it should be assumed you’ll be “Googled.”
and,
2. Dave rocks.

Flag this comment

11.

KG
Aug 7, 2009 9:38 AM CST

I’m sorry, what are we discussing? I blacked out.

Flag this comment

12.

Esq.
Aug 7, 2009 10:19 AM CST

It sounds like common sense.  Just look at the embarassment that President Bush endured when he nominated Bernard Kerik to head the Department of Homeland Security, when a simple Google search would have shown that the man was the target of numerous corruption investigations, many of which have since lead to felony charges.

Flag this comment

13.

Steve
Aug 7, 2009 11:21 AM CST

To add to what Dave said…

First, if you did put that stuff up, well, you are screwed, between Google and all of the other meta search engines and crawlers you stuff is stored and saved over and over and over.  Yes, you can eliminate it from the original site, however, chances are someone can still find it for years to come.  So, if you are smart do not post anything that can come back to haunt you, basically, if you do not want anyone to know your views, your perspectives, etc. then do like Obama did…do not write…do not post…do not publish..then you can even run for president.

Flag this comment

14.

P. Bryson
Aug 7, 2009 12:20 PM CST

Umm, Steve, did you miss all of the talk during the campaign about the books Obama wrote: The Audacity of Hope and Dreams of My Father? Both of those made Obama’s views pretty clear.

Flag this comment

15.

J.D.
Aug 7, 2009 12:36 PM CST

Dave, Obama DID write… but he’s decided to hide under lock and key all of his college and law school writings. He knows that what he wrote would prevent him from winning an election. And considering his background—e.g. Reverend Wright—Obama’s writings are probably FULL of anti-white, anti-Jew, anti-American, socialist rhetoric.

And Bryson: don’t you understand that “all the talk about” Obama’s book “during the campaign” was all part of the plan? Hide the accurate stuff, promote the fluff, run for office.

Flag this comment

16.

B. McLeod
Aug 7, 2009 2:51 PM CST

I think it is funny to see a complaint that writings have been “hidden,” when the source of that complaint is the very person who just wants to go back to find anything (even so much as a 5th grade book report) that can be distorted, taken out of context, or otherwise misused for a political attack.

Flag this comment

17.

Avon
Aug 7, 2009 4:24 PM CST

How about credit reports?
Today’s front page of the NYTimes (see NYTimes.com) says that credit reports have become so inexpensive and quick that many employers now get one on every applicant.  If you had bankruptcy, or judgments, or even just too many bills to pay (regardless of how good a reason there was), you may be disqualified from earning a living.  Vicious circle, or what?

The article faces the tough questions like what can you want from an unemployed person, whether it matters what job is to be filled, and whether it’s wrong for states to make it illegal for employers to get the credit reports (as some have recently legislated).

Makes “spying” on an applicant’s blog look like a pretty minor issue by comparison.

Flag this comment

18.

B. McLeod
Aug 8, 2009 7:35 PM CST

That poses similar issues.  If the employer obtains a credit report showing a personal bankruptcy, or even garnshments, then does not hire an otherwise qualified applicant, there could be trouble.  Employers (including law firms, who tend to think of themselves as above the law) should consult with competent counsel concerning limitations on information that is appropriately considered in pre-employment screening and employment decisions.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.