Image via Wikipedia
A writer at the academic publiction Inside Higher Ed scopes out the future of the academic library in "Bookless Libraries?"
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=3343f451-5a1c-4304-911d-e6d300a2ccfa)
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Libraries Minus Books = ?
A writer at the academic publiction Inside Higher Ed scopes out the future of the academic library in "Bookless Libraries?"
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Margaret Cho to Portray Paralegal in New Series
Comedian and actress Margaret Cho, who plays smart-mouthed paralegal Teri Lee in the US series, says the show is a natural response to the shallow portrayal of women on television. "I think we, as a collective of women, started to feel invisible in the world of The Hills and Gossip Girl," she says, "so this show is responding to something. It addresses that need to feel visible, to see women who look like ourselves. There's just so much out there that isn't for women in a positive way." Read more: http://paralegalgateway.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/margaret-cho-to-portray-paralegal-in-new-series.html
Comedian and actress Margaret Cho, who plays smart-mouthed paralegal Teri Lee in the US series, says the show is a natural response to the shallow portrayal of women on television. "I think we, as a collective of women, started to feel invisible in the world of The Hills and Gossip Girl," she says, "so this show is responding to something. It addresses that need to feel visible, to see women who look like ourselves. There's just so much out there that isn't for women in a positive way." Read more: http://paralegalgateway.typepad.com/my_weblog/2009/08/margaret-cho-to-portray-paralegal-in-new-series.html
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Background Checks on Facebook
Facebook may be the stickiest social network here in the U.S.—but LinkedIn is thought to be the default network for a “professional” profile and job history. So why are more employers using Facebook to do background...…Read on: http://www.linkedin.com/news?viewArticle=&articleID=60706475&gid=106508&articleURL=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Ereuters%2Ecom%2Farticle%2FpaiddealsAtoms%2FidUS90138079120090819%3Frpc%3D59&urlhash=JxfT&trk=news_discuss
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Social Media in the Workplace
Courts and legislatures have given employers extraordinary grasp over employee's minds and bodies in the workplace. And some grab for more; lawmakers in a few states have felt it necessary to draw a legal line to prevent employers from dictating to workers what they can do in their own homes -- smoking, for instance.
Courts, though, are firmly planted on the employer's side, rejecting, for example, any claim of employee privacy in the workplace. Bosses may read workers' e-mails, no matter how personal in nature (after all, they own the email system and every neuron the worker brings to the desk, the argument goes). They may also read worker's personal postings on social media networks -- which cease really being personal when in individual hits "Post" on a public website. Employers have even won court decisions allowing them to censor postings of their employees on their "private" social network pages, on various trade secrets or defamation grounds.
In addition to litigation options, bosses can hit the red "Fired" button any time they want, for any reason they want, almost without legal limitation. Only proof of a discriminatory motive in firing offers an employee any chance of relief ("relief" in an almost comic sense -- your back pay money, if any is left, after litigation expenses and taxes, plus the opportunity to go back to work for someone who doesn't want you).
All this sounds grim for the employee and paints the employer in sinister hues. But try to sit your mind across the desk. A simple example illustrates that an employer's motives for monitoring worker communication might not be so reptilian after all. If a worker is sexually harassing a co-worker, on his own time with his own social networking accounts, can the employer ignore a complaint by that co-worker? As most things in the law, "spying on employees" is a more complicated issue than it looks.
For a quick look at some of the legal issues employers face in dealing with electronic communications in the workplace, see:
From 8/13/09 Law.com: Protecting Employers From New Media
http://www.law.com/jsp/legaltechnology/pubArticleLT.jsp?id=1202432991714&Protecting_Employers_From_New_Media
--posted by Mike Brigner
Courts, though, are firmly planted on the employer's side, rejecting, for example, any claim of employee privacy in the workplace. Bosses may read workers' e-mails, no matter how personal in nature (after all, they own the email system and every neuron the worker brings to the desk, the argument goes). They may also read worker's personal postings on social media networks -- which cease really being personal when in individual hits "Post" on a public website. Employers have even won court decisions allowing them to censor postings of their employees on their "private" social network pages, on various trade secrets or defamation grounds.
In addition to litigation options, bosses can hit the red "Fired" button any time they want, for any reason they want, almost without legal limitation. Only proof of a discriminatory motive in firing offers an employee any chance of relief ("relief" in an almost comic sense -- your back pay money, if any is left, after litigation expenses and taxes, plus the opportunity to go back to work for someone who doesn't want you).
All this sounds grim for the employee and paints the employer in sinister hues. But try to sit your mind across the desk. A simple example illustrates that an employer's motives for monitoring worker communication might not be so reptilian after all. If a worker is sexually harassing a co-worker, on his own time with his own social networking accounts, can the employer ignore a complaint by that co-worker? As most things in the law, "spying on employees" is a more complicated issue than it looks.
For a quick look at some of the legal issues employers face in dealing with electronic communications in the workplace, see:
From 8/13/09 Law.com: Protecting Employers From New Media
http://www.law.com/jsp/legaltechnology/pubArticleLT.jsp?id=1202432991714&Protecting_Employers_From_New_Media
--posted by Mike Brigner
Friday, August 14, 2009
Julie & Julia
For all of us would-be bloggers, this is a film to see. The Julie character raises the bar for bloggers, by setting a daunting goal for herself. We can draw at least two good lessons. First, starting up a blog is easy and fun. Second, a successful blog is a combination of interesting writing and persistence, persistence, persistence.
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)