Ouch, it sounds like a few people that I know! I hate it when people assume that the Internet gives them a free range to let lose and fun wild, because that isn't it. It is still subjected to law and while in countries like my own, we may have free speech but that doesn't mean everything we want or feel the need to say should be said. Perhaps it is time for a Internet common sense lesson for some is in order?

I remember one judge denying a libel claim because it was opinion, and I've seen a few instances where the U.K. seems to have problems determining the difference between the two.

Rather than argue about what defines libel vs. opinion however, what organizations need to focus on is 'defensive driving' as far as their social media is concerned.

Every organization needs a social media policy that's treated like a living creature -- updated regular based on what's learned.  As to training -- the best training for social is observation of the networks.  Rather than focus on posting, focus on listening to get a feel for the target market network first and foremost.  Staying polite and responding to people respectfully is far less risky (and potentially more effective) than trying to be clever and broadcasting.

You're right David: what's appropriate for some enterprises would be completely inappropriate for others.  I suspect many, many businesses have employees out their on the Web, talking about the company and the product, with no formal training at all.

As with Mashka, I focus on this line "Are employees trained to understand when they are acting as spokespersons for the enterprise, and what counts as appropriate and inappropriate conduct?"

Which leads to even more questions

• Do the people with overall authority over the management of social media know how to train their employees?  These issues/services are so new - who knows how to train these people?
  
  
• Does the company have a definition of "appropriate" and "inappropriate?"  For example, the ThinkGeek site (great brand) lives on humor and sarcasm in their emails and website.  Something that would be completely appropriate for a ThinkGeek social media use - may not work for a Credit Union.  For years marketers have struggled with how to create a consistent voice when you had only a small cadre of employees who spoke publicly, marketed etc.  Now almost everybody is a company spokseperson and how do you find that consistency?

It almost seems like whatever training you do on Monday with regards to social media would be outdated by Friday!

The expansion of legal technicalities just reminds me to always travel with a lawyer. Things are getting way to complex it seems. Different countries, different laws. I can see why there's never going to be a shortage of lawyers and officials making new regulations, often differing depending on location.

Are employees trained to understand when they are acting as spokespersons for the enterprise, and what counts as appropriate and inappropriate conduct?

May be the problem is that they HAVE TO BE TRAINED, while most probably, they are just given some paper with a job instruction where it's written something like

-You have to realize that  from this moment you are a spokeperson for the enterprise and you shouldn't place any inappropriate content at your social media profiles

Thank you very much,  I read it, I got it, I immediatelly forgot about it:)

hounhosp, - The way i see it, one is liable for every single line of text they put up online. If it is about someone else, there is always a real risk that you could end up in court. Realistically though, for the minor non-damaging content i think we are often free to talk about public figures like politicians.

@dcawrey

Hmm..."I would think at this point we can call social media a mature enough technology that would put it on the same legal grounds as other media."

That has been the subject of many debates. I agree that blogger should be accountable for any they say online. But what about simple social media end users? Should their posts be put on the same legal grounds as articles by professional journalists?