menu
Logo
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: Inside the college cops who monitor athletes' Twitter and Facebook accounts
Page: 1 of 1
Tim Burke
General User
Member Since: 11/23/2004
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Post Count: 607
mail
Tim Burke
mail
Posted: 5/24/2012 2:50 PM
http://deadspin.com/5912230/dont-say-colt-45-or-pearl-nec...

http://deadspin.com/5912832/ass-ranger-to-zoomies-heres-t...

I'm guessing our athletic department is too poor to subscribe to such a service. 
Alan Swank
General User
AS
Member Since: 12/12/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,375
person
mail
Alan Swank
mail
Posted: 5/24/2012 3:56 PM
I love this last paragraph from the first link:

Colleges have gotten shy, too. Louisville, a UDiligence client, denied our open records request for the social media reports given to the athletic department. (We weren't looking for any names or identifying information—we only wanted to know what the reports looked like.) Why were we turned down? "The release of these summary reports," wrote senior compliance officer Sherri Pawson in an email, "would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy of the students."

And having to turn over access to your accounts isn't?  Unbelievable.

L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 5/24/2012 5:03 PM
Colleges have always limited  the access of the press to athletes. With the advent of social media, I think things will continue to evolve for awhile. When an athlete said something unfortunate to a friend, in the old days, it didn't have the same impact as if he said the same thing, and 1000 people get to see it.  As for whether monitoring is the answer, I have mixed feelings about it. The one thing is that it is not done in secrecy. The students are asked to install the software, and they do it, knowing that it is there. I would feel differently if the students were not aware they were being monitored.
Tim Burke
General User
Member Since: 11/23/2004
Location: St. Petersburg, FL
Post Count: 607
mail
Tim Burke
mail
Posted: 5/24/2012 9:16 PM
They aren't asked to install the software, they are REQUIRED.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,709
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 5/24/2012 10:41 PM
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
I love this last paragraph from the first link:

Colleges have gotten shy, too. Louisville, a UDiligence client, denied our open records request for the social media reports given to the athletic department. (We weren't looking for any names or identifying information—we only wanted to know what the reports looked like.) Why were we turned down? "The release of these summary reports," wrote senior compliance officer Sherri Pawson in an email, "would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy of the students."

And having to turn over access to your accounts isn't?  Unbelievable.



Spot on, Alan.  This kind of double-talk from senior university administrators always drives me crazy.  The Buckley Amendment, which is usually the piece of legislation they try to hide behind, should be repealed.  I could tell you a bunch of horror stories about how this has been misused, but then I would be violating confidentiality myself.  How ironic!
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 5/24/2012 10:52 PM
Tim Burke wrote:expand_more
They aren't asked to install the software, they are REQUIRED.

They aren't required to play football, and they aren't required to play football at that particular school, so I disagree. They do have a choice about whether to install it. I'm sure that for some people this will be a recruiting issue.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 6/18/2012 2:19 PM
This may be a cleaner solution - just make a rule - no Twitter by athletes.  It's certainly less expensive than trying to monitor the accounts.
Last Edited: 6/18/2012 2:20:23 PM by L.C.
Showing Messages: 1 - 7 of 7



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)