In today’s world, it’s easy to forget an important fact. What we post on social media doesn’t just reflect on us personally. It can also reflect on our employers.
Many organizations have policies. Sometimes they even have contractual clauses. These allow them to take action if an employee’s public statements cross certain lines.
Everyone has the right to express their views. It’s important to be mindful of how those words could be perceived. Consider the potential consequences they carry.
It’s also easy to forget how permanent the internet really is. Even if you remove a post there is no guarantee that someone hasn’t taken a screenshot of the post beforehand.
I’ll admit, I’ve made posts in the past that weren’t the wisest choices. In one case, I ended up in a conversation with my human resources department because of something I posted.
After that, I scrubbed all references to employers from my personal profiles. Of course, that’s not a foolproof way to keep things from getting back to your workplace. I still maintain a LinkedIn profile. It lists my employment history. The truth is people can be surprisingly skilled at internet sleuthing. More often than not, they can figure out where someone works — or even lives.
Recent events have made the stakes even clearer. According to reporting in The New York Times, more than 145 people across the country have lost their jobs. They were fired, suspended, or pushed out after making statements about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
These weren’t just public figures or media personalities. They were nurses, restaurant workers, nonprofit staffers, and even a police officer.
- A nurse in Phoenix lost her job after joking near a nurses’ station about the shooting, even though she never wished Kirk dead.
- A nonprofit literacy worker in Milwaukee was fired after posting on Facebook about gun violence. She wrote, “Yes I am making his death political, no I do not care.” She intended to highlight policy issues. However, others interpreted her words as saying Kirk “got what he deserved.”
- In Wisconsin, an elementary school administrator was wrongly accused of celebrating Kirk’s death. Even though the post wasn’t hers, she was flooded with death threats. She had to leave her home. She returned to school only with extra police security.
These stories highlight a bigger problem: what we mean isn’t always what people hear. Tone, body language, and inflection matter in spoken conversation. Online, all of that disappears. A laughing emoji, a sarcastic remark, or a blunt opinion can be stripped of its context. It can then be interpreted in the worst possible light.
And once a post is out there, it can be picked up, shared, and judged far beyond its original audience. A message written for 70 friends can end up in front of 70,000 strangers. An employer may suddenly feel pressure to act.
This raises difficult questions. The First Amendment protects speech from government punishment, but it doesn’t shield employees from workplace consequences. Employers, fearing reputational damage or political backlash, often act quickly — sometimes too quickly — when controversial speech surfaces. That leaves workers navigating a world where one poorly worded post could cost them their livelihood.
I don’t pretend to have all the answers. People should be mindful of what they share online. But I also believe we need more nuance and grace. Everyone has said things they regret. Sometimes what looks like cruelty is really clumsy anger. It might also be gallows humor or frustration taken out of context.
In a society where “the internet never forgets,” we should practice remembering something important. Human beings are more than their worst posts.
I’m of an age where I grew up right as the internet was going mainstream. I was finishing college when Facebook first started taking off. I’ve seen both the “wild west” era of online posting. Also, I’ve seen today’s world where a single misstep can follow you forever.
I see both sides. Employees need to think before they post. Employers and the public also need to remember that one post doesn’t define a person’s entire character.
So I’ll end with this: How do we balance accountability with compassion in the digital age? How should we weigh the permanence of words written online against the humanity of the people who write them? I’d love to hear your thoughts in the comments.
Leave a Reply