PBT Consulting

TECH EMPLOYERS ASKING JOB HUNTERS FOR THEIR FACEBOOK PASSWORDS, AND 1 IN 5 ARE REJECTING JOB APPLICANTS OVER THEIR SM POSTS

Social media profiles are a great way to network and promote yourself, both personally and professionally, but they are also a great way to sabotage yourself with stupid, incriminating content.

And indeed, it turns out that one out of five technology firms has rejected a job applicant because of something they included on their social media profile, according to the 2012 annual technology market survey conducted by Eurocom Worldwide and its associated agencies.

This finding is especially remarkable because a previous wave of the study found that only around 40% of the tech executives surveyed were even looking at profiles of job applicants at all. While that number has probably increased, the fact remains that a large proportion of executives who look at social media profiles are finding something they don’t like.

Mads Christensen, Network Director at Eurocom Worldwide, offered a summary of the findings which makes me want to climb in bed, turn the lights out, and pull the covers over my head forever:

“The 21st century human is learning that every action leaves an indelible digital trail. In the years ahead many of us will be challenged by what we are making public in various social forums today.”

More positively for social media, the Eurocom survey also found that 49% of tech executives said they plan to increase spending on social media in the next year. Of course, social media is still haunted by the unresolved question of ROI, as 57% of surveys said they are still unable to measure the impact of social media spending.

COMMENTARY:  For quite a while I have been warning my readers about professional social media snooping firms like Social Intelligence Corporation, a firm that makes a living investigating what job applicatioins say and post online, especially on social networks like Facebook and Twitter and reporting their findings to employers who hire them.  Social Intelligence Corporation does this legally and there is not much you can do about it.  

Besides verifying prior employment, many employer's are now conducting background checks, credit checks, drug tests, and now social media investigations.  Many will require job applications to sign an authorization giving them this authority.  If you haven't already done so, I urge you to read my previous blog posts dated October 3, 2010, February 3, 2012 and March 8, 2012.   

Now we find that employers have been asking their employees and new job applications to provide them with the password to their social media accounts on Facebook, Twitter and others.  This is the straw that broke the camels back, because it is going far overboard in violating our privacy.   Non-profit organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU.org), PrivacyRights.org and BackgroundCheck.org believe that employers have gone too far so have collaborated in designing the following Social Networking Bill of Rights.

 Click Image To Enlarge

Due to The Great Recession and a slow recovering U.S. economy, jobs in some part of America are very hard to comeby, and employers have become very selective, are using selective and discriminatory hiring practices like requiring that you already be gainfully employed to even apply for a job, others are discriminating on the basis of age and getting away with it, and now they believe that they can legally violate our privacy by asking for our social network passwords.  Well, I am here to tell you that they can't.  So no matter how great that new company is, how great the new job is, or how much money they throw at you, if they ask you to give up the passwords to your social networks watchout.  You tell them from me:  "No!!"  In fact, you tell them "Fuck No!!"  It's none of their business and an invasion of your privacy.  I would also report the incident to the ACLU and PrivacyRights.org.

Facebook agrees with me on the subject of  releasing your social network password to employers. On March 23, 2012, here's what Erin Egan, Facebook Chief Privacy Officer said about the new practice by some employers to ask employees and new job applications for their social network account passwords:

"In recent months, we’ve seen a distressing increase in reports of employers or others seeking to gain inappropriate access to people’s Facebook profiles or private information. This practice undermines the privacy expectations and the security of both the user and the user’s friends. It also potentially exposes the employer who seeks this access to unanticipated legal liability."

"The most alarming of these practices is the reported incidents of employers asking prospective or actual employees to reveal their passwords.  If you are a Facebook user, you should never have to share your password, let anyone access your account, or do anything that might jeopardize the security of your account or violate the privacy of your friends.  We have worked really hard at Facebook to give you the tools to control who sees your information."

"As a user, you shouldn’t be forced to share your private information and communications just to get a job.  And as the friend of a user, you shouldn’t have to worry that your private information or communications will be revealed to someone you don’t know and didn’t intend to share with just because that user is looking for a job.  That’s why we’ve made it a violation of Facebook’s  Statement of Rights and Responsibilities to share or solicit a Facebook password."

"We don’t think employers should be asking prospective employees to provide their passwords because we don’t think it’s the right thing to do.  But it also may cause problems for the employers that they are not anticipating.  For example, if an employer sees on Facebook that someone is a member of a protected group (e.g. over a certain age, etc.) that employer may open themselves up to claims of discrimination if they don’t hire that person." 

"Employers also may not have the proper policies and training for reviewers to handle private information.  If they don’t—and actually, even if they do—the employer may assume liability for the protection of the information they have seen or for knowing what responsibilities may arise based on different types of information (e.g. if the information suggests the commission of a crime)."

"Facebook takes your privacy seriously.  We’ll take action to protect the privacy and security of our users, whether by engaging policymakers or, where appropriate, by initiating legal action, including by shutting down applications that abuse their privileges."

"While we will continue to do our part, it is important that everyone on Facebook understands they have a right to keep their password to themselves, and we will do our best to protect that right."

-- Erin Egan, Chief Privacy Officer, Policy

While I am on the subject of privacy.  I highly recommend that you NOT use company computers to access your personal email or social network accounts or do any web surfing (unless the latter is required in your job performance).  IT departments have been known to track your online behaviors while at work.  Many employees have been fired over this.  About 40% of employers now ban social networking from the workplace even if you are using your smartphone, and if you post something derogatory about them on your social network, you are just asking for problems. Remember, unless you have an employment contract, in most states you are an at-will employee, and can be fired for any reason.   

Courtesy of an article dated March 19, 2012 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf    and an article dated March 20, 2012 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf

STEVE JOBS ON FOXCONN: "WE'RE ALL OVER THIS. FOXCONN IS NOT A SWEATSHOP. IT'S VERY TROUBLING. WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE IT OUT."

Of all of the Steve Jobs interviews, and believe me, there are not many videos of the King of Magical Devices being interviewed and put under the hot seat.  Steve Jobs would never subject himself to that, or admit any wrong doing.   However, Steve agreed to be interviewed by All Things Digital at the D8 Conference in 2010, about accusations of horrible sweatshop working conditions, unsafe working conditions, and 13 plant worker suicides at Foxconn International's plant in China, the company that manufacturer's Apple's iPhone, iPad and iPod.  

I would've loved to have had Steve Jobs "wired" at the time of the interview.  And just to prove that I have balls, I would've wired the other end to myself.  Everytime Steve lied, it would send a fiew volts of electricity that would give me a nice jolt.  It would've been like the 4th of July.  I would've litup like a candle, and I am sure Apple Evangelists would enjoy the spectacle.   I wonder what other wonderful tidbits of information we could've learned about Time's "Person of the Year for 2010?" 

Here's the video.  Please, no more hateful mail or nasty comments.  

 

Don't get me wrong.  I love Apple products, I think they are beautifully designed and engineered products that people absolutely lust for.   Steve Jobs is without any doubt the greatest entrepreneur and technology innovator of the modern era even though he did get some help from alien technology along the way.  

In a blog post dated March 29, 2012, I reported that Apple CEO Tim Cook had visited Foxconn International's plant in China, and he looked dapper in that yellow rubberized plant worker outfit, don't you think?  I love it when the CEO of a major company "grabs the bull by the horns," and personally takes the time to visit the site of all the carnage and widespread pollution.   If anybody knew what was going on over in China it was Tim, the architect of Apple's outsourced manufacturing model.    

Courtesy of All Things Digital and E.T. 

GIRLS ARE SMARTER THAN BOYS WHEN THEY ARE YOUNGER. BUT WHY DON'T THEY PURSUE MORE CAREERS IN MATH AND SCIENCE?

IF GIRLS HAVE SLIGHTLY HIGHER IQS AND GET BETTER GRADES, WHY ARE THEIR NUMBERS DISPROPORTIONATELY LOW IN MATH AND SCIENCE CAREERS?

I still remember learning in grade school that men were better at math and science, and women were better at English and art. The teacher (who was a woman), presented the information as a general fact--noting that these were just loose guidelines that could differ from person to person--and I didn’t question it for a second. You know, until I grew up a bit and realized the very premise was preposterous.

But as this infographic (which is really a narrative of sorts) shows us, it’s not enough to right the wrongs of gender perception when people grow older, the damage has already been done.

Click Image To Enlarge

A lot of these facts are likely nuggets you’ve heard before, like girls performing worse on tests when they are required to mark their gender. But seeing each factoid lined up in pseudo-chronological order, from a grade schooler to a professional, it seems inevitable that women don’t stake their place in industries already dominated by men.

The picture is incomplete, of course. We don’t see how the comparative self-esteem of men evolves over the same time. But it’s safe to say that, when only 16% of students in engineering classes are women, we’re doing something wrong--especially when we can all benefit from some fresh perspective.

Twenty years or so after that day in grade school, I’m a writer and my wife is a scientist. I guess that, given these gender-professional norms, you could make a joke about who wears the pants in my family. But it could never offend either of us. No matter what we do, she’ll still be smarter than me anyway.

COMMENTARY:    These are alarming statistics.  Makes you wonder what is the underlying cause of the loss of self-esteem among females.  Perhaps it could be that women simply do not care to pursue careers requiring too much math and science.  There are fewer of those type of jobs, and many of them are in academia or technology centers like Silicon Valley, and they very often do not pay very much, than jobs in the private sector.   Whatever the reason, it makes you wonder if the math and science "gap" that economists talk about and reasons why American universities are producing fewer engineers than China, Europe and India per capita is because of that gender gap in math and science.  

In a blog post dated September 29, 2011, the U.S. is producing more science and engineer graduates (undergrad and graduate) in 2008 than they did in 1998.  However, the state of science and engineering in the U.S. is still strong, yet the nation's lead is shrinking, according to the latest report from the National Science Board.  Based on a wide range of data - from R&D spending to higher-education trends in science and engineering fields - the group's Science and Engineering Indicators 2010 report suggests that U.S. dominance of world science and engineering has deteriorated significantly in recent years, due in large part to rapidly increasing capabilities in China and other Asian economies.

However, U.S. high-technology employers have given our educational system a bad rap, claiming that we don't produce sufficient science and engineering students to fill their employment requirements.  They always seem to bitch about the limitation on H1B visas.  We have already outsourced nearly 20 million jobs overseas, and employers are trying to do the same thing by importing more science and engineers at lower wages.  I remember a "60 Minutes" documentary about why they hire foreign engineers.  They claim they are smarter.  I think that's bullshit.  The real reason is economic--they are cheaper.  U.S. employers are using the H1B visa as a gimick to reduce overall science and engineering wages.   I say, hire American, keep those jobs here, and provide incentives for U.S. students to pursue science and math courses. 

It appears that the shortage of females in careers requiring science and math is not strictly a U.S. problem.   A similar problem exists in India, a bastian of math and science graduates, and important source of software engineers for Silicon Valley.   In fact,  the percentage of females studying science, engineering/technology and medicine are in the low teens when compared to their Indian male counterparts.   Only 15.8% and 16.5% of India's graduate and doctoral candidates are female respectively.   It would not surprise me that similar numbers exist in Japan, a very male dominated society, but I don't have the data.    If anybody does, post it in the blog.   

Courtesy of an article dated March 21, 2012 appearing in Fast Company Design

STUDY: FACEBOOK BEING USED BY EMPLOYERS TO SELECT WORKERS AND THE SOCIAL MEDIA SNOOPING FIRMS THEY USE

Employers already know it’s a good idea to check job candidates’ Facebook pages to make sure there aren’t any horrible red flags there. The reddest flags for most employers seem to be drugs, drinking, badmouthing former employers, and lying about one’s qualifications. But there’s another good reason for checking out a candidate’s Facebook page before inviting them in for an interview: it may be a fairly accurate reflection of how good they’ll be at the job.

That’s the conclusion in a study published in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology last month. The researchers hired HR types to rate hundreds of college students’ Facebook pages according to how employable they seemed.

One of the study author’s, Don Kluemper, of Northern Illinois University says. 

“We asked them to form impressions of a candidate based solely on their Facebook page.”

This involved looking at what was publicly available on those pages (photos, status updates, and conversations with friends) and then assigning each person a score for a number of qualities important to being a good employee, such as their degree of emotionally stability, conscientiousness, extroversion, intellectual curiosity and agreeableness. (In other words, will they flip out on you, care about completing tasks, be fun to work with, be creative in problem solving, and be willing to kiss up when necessary?) The review took about five to ten minutes per profile.

Six months later, the researchers got in touch with their guinea pigs’ employers to ask about their job performances. Unfortunately, of the over 500 guinea pigs, just 56 of the employers responded. So the sample is small, but the researchers found a strong correlation between those employers’ reviews and the employability predictions they had made based on folks’ profile pages.

I asked Kluemper about the “personality red flags” that their reviewers looked for. He was a little vague but said that a person with obvious mood swings, who is overly emotional in their postings would not be an attractive candidate. Meanwhile, a person with a lot of Facebook friends who takes a lot of crazy photos would be rated as extroverted and friendly — which are attractive qualities in a candidate.

Key takeaway for hiring employers: The Facebook page is the first interview; if you don’t like a person there, you probably won’t like working with them. The bad news for employers, though, who are hoping to take the Facebook shortcut Kluemper said.

“So many more profiles are restricted in what the public can access.” 

Given the small sample size for that first study, I was more impressed by the second. In the second study, the researchers did a similar assessment of students’ Facebook selves and also had the students take personality and IQ tests. Then, instead of following up with employers, they turned to students’ transcripts.  Kluemper says.  

“We were able to better predict a student’s academic success based on their Facebook page than on the cognitive tests.” 

(Most universities claim they don’t stalk applicants on social networking sites during the admissions process. Maybe they should?)

Of course, there are some legal questions to think about before jumping into someone’s Facebook page. Employers can discriminate against potential employees who seem like bummers based on their Wall postings and interests, but will get into trouble if what the Facebook user has said about their religious views affects the hiring process.

COMMENTARY:  For quite a while I have been warning my readers about the dangers of posting or saying offensive things on Facebook, Twitter and other social networks.   Unless you make your Facebook or Twitter page private, you are an open book, and whatever you post on your social network page, could come back to haunt you, no matter how qualified you may be for the job.  

The addition of Facebook's Timeline is going to be a goldmine for employers because it makes it much easier for an employer to dig up dirt you may have long forgotten about.  If you've said some derogatory things about an opposing political party or candidate, a former employer or co-worker, or even an ex-girlfriend or spouse, even the boss' favorite sports team, this can be viewed very negatively by employers.

Law enforcement organizations and government agencies like the FBI, NSA and the CIA are actively involved and working closely with many of the major social networks to conduct investigations, gather evidence and track down criminals and terrorists.  Much of this investigation and data gathering is done under the auspices of the Patriot Act in the interest of national security, so in special circumstances they may not be required to obtain a subpoena to access your private Facebook or Twitter account. The former Director of the CIA testified before a U.S. Senate subcommittee about the billions Facebook had saved the agency. The director said with a smile on his face,

"After years of secretly monitoring the public, we were astounded that so many people would willingly publicize where they lived, their religious and political views, alphabetize a list of all their friends' personal email addresses, phone numbers, hundreds of photos of themselves, and even status updates of what they were doing moment-to-moment.  It is truly a dream come true for the CIA."

Here, checkout the YouTube video yourself.

   

To assist employers in their hiring decisions, many employers are now using what I call "professional social media snooping" firms to scour the internet to find out what you say and post online, particularly on social networks like Facebook, Twitter, and others.  In a blog post dated October 3, 2010, I profiled Social Intelligence Corporation, one of these social media snoopers, and at that time called it a "creepy startup" and "truly scary" company.  

Apparently consumers hurt by this companies activities filed complaints with the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), claiming they were in violation of the Federal Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) of 1996, 2004 with amendments there to.

On May 9, 2011, the Federal Trade Commission ruled on behalf of Social Intelligence Corp claiming that they were not in violation of the Federal Credit Reporting Act.  This effectively gave Social Intellignece Corporation the legality to provide social media consumer reports to employers conducting background checks on prospective employees.

On February 3, 2012, I told you about the growing trend by employers to use social media snooping firms to help employers screen employees through their social media behaviors. It's not just a U.S. trend, employers all over the world are now using social media snooping firms.  More than half of my readers are from countries outside the U.S., so you should be aware of this.  

 

According to Social Intelligence Corp. CEO Max Drucker, the company focuses on screening social media profiles for the usual suspects -- racist remarks, sexually explicit content, pictures with guns, knives, or other weapons, and other illegal behavior (think bongs).

There are some limits on how employers may use archived social media content, however. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, companies are required to tell prospective employees (or, say, credit applicants) that they are going to perform background check and obtain their permission to do so. Employers are also required by law to tell the applicant about any damaging information they find online.

The majority of my readers probably have nothing to worry about, but if you have a previous felony conviction, been fired for cause, previously lost your job due to a layoff, and you voiced your anger online, you have a lot to risk.  By some estimates, as many as 40% of longterm unemployed may be in limbo and simply unemployable because of their online social media behaviors.   Social media snooping firms have already expanded into the insurance industry.   Their reports could cause you to lose your health or life insurance coverage or prevent you from obtaining insurance coverage.  If you have any experience or information about the activities of these snoopers, post it on my blog, or shoot me an email.   I have a feeling we have just scratched the surface.                            

Courtesy of an article dated March 5, 2012 appearing in Forbes 

 

HOW 'SOCIAL SNOOPING' SERVICES ARE HELPING EMPLOYERS SCREEN EMPLOYEES THROUGH THEIR SOCIAL MEDIA BEHAVIORS

Hopefully most readers of this column are aware that their social media profiles are fair game for potential employers, who may peruse the photos and updates posted to a Facebook page to gather evidence as to the character and sobriety (often literally) of a prospective job candidate. This week brings more evidence that ill-advised social media content can hurt your chances, courtesy of a survey of executives responsible for hiring decisions in Australia.

The survey of 1,255 bosses and other hiring executives, conducted by Pure Profile on behalf of Australian telecom Telestra, found that 28% of the respondents use social media to screen job candidates by doing research into their backgrounds. Within this group, respondents said they were turned off by something posted on a profile around 40% of the time. That compares to one-third who said that something posted on a profile helped decide them in favor of a particular candidate.

No surprise, one of the biggest mistakes made by job applicants in their social media profiles was criticizing their current employer:

• 44% of Australian employers who use social media for screening said they automatically disqualified jobseekers who posted critical comments about their current workplace, according to the Pure Profile-Telestra survey.
• 37% said making discriminatory remarks about your previous employer was an automatic deal-breaker.
• 31% of employers actually fired an employee who made critical remarks about them.

Again unsurprisingly, Facebook was the most popular source of information on job candidates, used by bosses:

• 41% of bosses screened applicants using Facebook.  
• 31% of bosses screened applicants using LinkedIn
• 14% of bosses screened applicants using Twitter
• 7% of bosses screened applicants using both YouTube and MySpace 

Interestingly, social media surveillance may continue even after someone lands a job:  

• 43% of Aussie employers say they accept friend requests from their employees. 
• 33% of Aussie employers say they check their employees’ social media profiles. 
• 18% of Aussie employers say they monitor their employees to make sure the employees aren’t badmouthing the company online. 
• 15% of Aussie employers say they monitor for productivity.

Back in the U.S., there’s no question employers are zeroing in on social media profiles as sources of information about job candidates -- sometimes with the help of professional background researchers. In June of this year I wrote about a decision by the Federal Trade Commission which effectively allows everything an individual puts on social media (which is publicly available under their privacy settings) to be archived by third parties for up to seven years, for the explicit purpose of background checks -- even if the individual has deleted the content in question from his or her own account.

The FTC determined that a company called Social Intelligence Corp. was operating within the bounds of the law when it created "cached" archives of social media profiles for review by employers, including potentially damaging photos and statements.

According to Social Intelligence Corp. CEO Max Drucker, the company focuses on screening social media profiles for the usual suspects -- racist remarks, sexually explicit content, pictures with guns, knives, or other weapons, and other illegal behavior (think bongs).

There are some limits on how employers may use archived social media content, however. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act, companies are required to tell prospective employees (or, say, credit applicants) that they are going to perform background check and obtain their permission to do so. Also, companies must tell the applicant about any damaging information they find online.

COMMENTARY:   In a blog post dated October 3, 2010, I profiled Social Intelligence Corporation, a "creepy startup" and "truly scary" firm that screens job applicants by what they say or do on social networks for employers.    This is a quote from Max Drucker, CEO of Social Intelligence Corp:

"Once employees have been hired, their online behavior poses a possible threat to your company. Employees may criticize managers or coworkers on a social networking site, post questionable photos on a blog, or regularly update personal sites while on the clock. Therefore, it is vital that employers implement and enforce a strong social media policy. Social Intelligence offers nearly real-time surveillance of employees' online behavior (based on e-mail, SMS, and workflow) using customizable reports, summaries, and screenshots to document activity. Findings are prioritized by predefined, color-coded alerts, ensuring that employers see only the information they desire. Consistent monitoring creates awareness and strict adherence among employees, thereby reducing “cyber slacking,” fraud, and negative company publicity. Social media monitoring leads to an increase in overall productivity and a significant improvement in your bottom line."

He says employers should "implement and enforce a strong social media policy" and he calls its service "nearly real-time surveillance of employees".   

The idea that your employer can play "Big Brother" on its employees in "real-time" including screening their "email, social media sites and workflow" is "truly scary."  Does this mean that employers are eavesdropping on their employees at will?   I call that invasion of privacy.  I would like to know what they mean by "workflow."  I would go as far as to call it "employer peeping-tom"  This should be worrisome for you.

In a blog dated October 3, 2011, I again profiled Social Intelligence Corporation, I discussed the Federal Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) of 1996, 2004 with amendments there to.  The FCRA is a fairly complex 86 page document (see below) that provides consumers with certain rights.  

Social Intelligence Corporation had been sued by privacy advocates claiming that the company was in violation of the FCRA, but the FTC dropped the case after its investigation of Social Intelligence, finding that it is in compliance with the guidelines of the Fair Credit Reporting Act. 

I became very interested in learning exactly what information Social Intelligence Corporation provides employers "using customizable reports, summaries, and screenshots to document activity," includking which social sites they were using for screening and how they determined that a particular jobseeker "presents a threat" to a prospective employer.   I sent them an email requesting this information, but I received a very lame response from one of their spokespersons that they could not provide that information unless I were a client.  

Social Intelligence Corporation provides two services to employers:

"Social Intelligence℠ Hiring is an FCRA compliant background screening service that enables employers to navigate the complicated legal landscape of social media with clear, consistent, and insightful results. Using a combination of automated and manual review processes, Social Intelligence Hiring ignores information that is not legally allowable in the hiring process, such as the “protected class” characteristics defined by federal anti-discrimination law (race, religion, national origin, age, sex, familial status, sexual orientation, disability status, and other qualities that are not allowed to be used as decision points). Therefore, job candidates are protected from discrimination based on these characteristics and, in turn, employers are protected from allegations of discrimination."

Social Intelligence Employment Solutions

"Social Intelligence℠ Monitoring enables employers to implement and enforce a strong social media policy. Using a combination of automated and manual review processes, Social Intelligence Monitoring provides a powerful, cost-effective method of alerting employers to social media policy violations, including negative publicity, fraud and “cyber slacking,” and mitigating risks posed by existing employees. As with Social Intelligence Hiring, Monitoring ignores “protected class” information to insulate employers from employee discrimination claims. Whether employees are displaying or discussing illegal behavior, publicly disparaging management online, discussing sensitive company information, or updating personal websites while at work, Social Intelligence Monitoring provides employers with the knowledge and tools necessary to protect their organizations."

The word "Monitoring" sounds an awful lot like "watching" or "spying".  If I say, "I am going to monitor you," I think you would automatically assume that I am watching you.  Yes, that's Big Brother watching over you.   

Incidentally, Social Intelligence Corporation is sponsoring a live webinar titled, "Using Social Media for Hiring Online" on Friday, December 2, 2011 between 12:00 noon to 1:00 p.m. (PST).  Here's what's on the agenda:  

"Attendees will learn what social media is and how to use it their advantage when hiring for their organization. They will learn its powerful way to augment traditional employment background screening using FCRA compliant social media searches. Lastly, we’ll show a demonstration how Social Intelligence and TalentWise makes a comprehensive social media screening simple and risk-free with searches that allow HR, recruiting and staffing professionals to gain deeper insight into job candidates’ personal and professional characteristics while screening candidates in a systematic way to ensure compliance with federal, state and local employment laws and the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA)."

I am pleased to report that I have registered for this webinar and encourage anyone interested in their invasion of privacy to do the same.  You can register HERE.   Just so you know I am in no way plugging Social Intelligence Corporation.

Courtesy of an article dated November 29, 2011 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf

TWITTER RELEASES HILARIOUS "JOIN THE FLOCK" JOB RECRUITMENT VIDEO, AND HOW FACEBOOK AND GOOGLE RECRUIT TALENT

Only a complete twit would refuse to favorite this Twitter recruitment video, which has notched more than 400,000 YouTube views since its launch on Friday. The clip skewers the frequently tacky genre (like the best parodies on Funny Or Die) while portraying the company as a geek-tastically hip place to work. Even CEO Dick Costolo gets in on the fun, playing straight man to subordinates Ian Padgham and Jeremy Briggs, who march into the boss's office to present a recruitment film that Costolo doesn't recall asking them to make. The hackneyed nature of this play-within-a-play setup is part of the joke, as is Padgham's goofy rah-rah patter as host.  He asserts at one point,

"Working at Twitter isn't just a sweet job. It's a way of life. A way of life that's like a sweet job. Boy, I wish I didn't already work here so I could apply for a job!"

We learn that Twitter offers "benefits" like T-shirts and bottles of wine. (At AdFreak, we get gym shorts and Schlitz.) Unlike Twitter's much-maligned branding commercial last year, this clip hits the bull's-eye, especially since the target is presumably in sync with the microblogging firm's corporate mind-set and attuned to silly humor. In that spirit, I applied for the first job I saw on the site: Cassandra Engineer. I bet she's hot! #WIN

 

#hackweek project: make the best/worst recruiting video of all time.   Done.  To find out more about jobs at Twitter visit: http://www.twitter.com/jobs or @jointheflock

COMMENTARY:   Twitter's recruitment ad is definitely a #WINNER.  Where do I send my resume. You'll find a listing of current Twitter job positions by clicking HERE.   Twitter benefits include:

• Complete medical/dental benefits
• Flexible and generous vacation policy
• Catered breakfast and lunch daily (in our San Francisco office)
• 401(k) savings plan
• Paid maternity and paternity leave
• Gym membership reimbursement
• Weekly in-office yoga and pilates classes
• Commuter program
• Laundry and dry cleaning service
• Zipcar discount
• Wireless discount

If working at @Twitter doesn't do it for you, then you might like to apply for a job at Facebook. The Facebook job recruitment video has higher production values than Twitter's recruitment vdeo and Zuck and his management team talk up about "the challenges of working at Facebook."  You can view Facebook's recruitment video by clicking the image below:

Click Image To View "Working At Facebook" Recruitment Video

If working for social media startups like @Twitter or #Facebook do not do it for you, then you might want to consider working for Google, the search giant whose motto is: "Do No Evil."  You can apply for Google jobs HERE.  

In a blog post dated May 5, 2011, I commented on an interview with Google's (then CEO) Eric Schmidt about how Google hires employees.  Google is known as Silicon Valley's premier Mecca for engineers, and this is their primary recruitment theme in Google's job recruitment video:

 

However, for unadulterated fun and hillarity, I highly recommend that you watch "Twitter, The Movie."   It was uploaded on YouTube in August 12, 2010, and now had 1,263,387 views since then.   I have posted it before, but now it is as good a time to do it all over again.  Enjoy.

 

Courtesy of an article dated January 30, 2012 appearing in AdWeek

GERALD CELENTE PREDICTED THE 2008 FINANCIAL COLLAPSE, NOW PREDICTS REVOLUTION, VIOLENCE, AND A NEW 3RD PARTY IN 2012

The notorious character "Humongous" from the "The Road Warrior" film.  Visions of the future economy.  All he wanted was some gas for his chopper, so he took matters into his own hands.

The man who predicted the 1987 stock market crash and the fall of the Soviet Union is now forecasting a  revolution in America, food riots and tax rebellions - all within four years, while cautioning that putting food on the table will be a more pressing concern than buying Christmas gifts by 2012.

Gerald Celente, the CEO of Trends Research Institute, is publisher of the Trends Journal which forecasts and analyzes business, socioeconomic, political, and other trends, and is renowned for his accuracy in predicting future world and economic events which can send a chill down your spine. 

Celente says that by 2012 America will become an underdeveloped nation, that there will be a revolution marked by food riots, squatter rebellions, tax revolts and job marches, and that holidays will be more about obtaining food, not gifts.

Celente, adding that the situation would be "worse than the greatdepression" said.

"We're going to see the end of the retail Christmas... we're going to see a fundamental shift take place... putting food on the table is going to be more important than putting gifts under the Christmas tree." 

Celente also said.  

"America's going to go through a transition the likes of which no one is prepared for."  

He notes that people's refusal to acknowledge that America was even in a recession highlights how big a problem denial is in being ready for the true scale of the crisis.

 

Celente, who successfully predicted the 1997 Asian Currency Crisis, the sub-prime mortgage collapse and the massive devaluation of the U.S. dollar, told UPI in November last year that the following year would be known as "The Panic of 2008," adding that "giants (would) tumble to their deaths," which is exactly what we have witnessed with the collapse of Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns and others.

He also said that the dollar would eventually be devalued by as much as 90 per cent. The consequence of what we have seen unfold this year would lead to a lowering in living standards, Celente predicted a year ago, which is also being borne out by plummeting retail sales figures.

The prospect of revolution was a concept echoed by a British Ministry of Defence report last year, which predicted that within 30 years, the growing gap between the super-rich and the middle class, along with an  urban underclass threatening social order would mean, 

"The world's middle classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest. The middle classes could become a revolutionary class."

In a separate recent interview, Celente went further on the subject of revolution in America.  He said. 

"There will be a revolution in this country.  It ' s not going to come yet, but it's going to come down the line and we 're going to see a third party and this was the catalyst for i t:  the takeover of Washington, D.C., in broad daylight by Wall Street in this bloodless coup. And it will happen as conditions continue to worsen."

He goes on to give us a horrid look into the future of America.  

"The first thing to do is organise with tax revolts. That's going to be the big one because people can't afford to pay more school tax, property tax, any kind of tax. You're going to start seeing those kinds of protests start to develop."

"It's going to be very bleak. Very sad. And there is going to be a lot of homeless, the likes of which we have never seen before.  Tent cities are already sprouting up around the country and we're going to see many more."

"We're going to start seeing huge areas of vacant real estate and squatters living in them as well. It's going to be a picture the likes of which Americans are not going to be used to." 

"It's going to come as a shock and with it, there's going to be a lot of crime.  And the crime is going to be a lot worse than it was before because in the last 1929 Depression, people's minds weren't wrecked on all these modern drugs,  over-the-counter drugs, or crystal meth or whatever it might be."

"So, you have a huge underclass of very desperate people with their minds chemically blown beyond anybody's comprehension."

The George Washington blog has compiled a list of quotes attesting to Celente's accuracy as a trend forecaster.

• CNN Headline News:  "When CNN wants to know about the Top Trends, we ask Gerald Celente."
• USA Today:  "Gerald Celente has a knack for getting the zeitgeist right."
• CNBC:  "There's not a better trend forecaster than Gerald Celente. The man  knows what he's talking about."
• The Wall Street Journal:  "Those who take their predictions seriously ...consider. Gerald Celente and the Trends Research Institute."
• The Atlantic Journal-Constitution:  "Gerald Celente is always ahead of the curve on trends and uncannily on the mark ... he's one of the most accurate forecasters around."
• The New York Times:   "Mr. Celente tracks the world's social, economic and business trends for corporate clients." 
• 48 Hours, CBS News:  "Mr. Celente is a very intelligent guy. We are able to learn about trends from an authority." 
• The Detroit News:  "Gerald Celente has a solid track record. He has predicted everything from the 1987 stock market crash and the demise of the Soviet Union to green marketing and corporate downsizing." 
• Chicago Tribune:  "Gerald Celente forecast the 1987 stock market crash, 'green marketing,' and the boom in gourmet coffees." 
• The Los Angeles Times:  "The Trends Research Institute is the Standard and Poor’s of Popular Culture." 
• New York Post:  "If Nostradamus were alive today, he'd have a hard time keeping up with Gerald Celente." 

So there you have it - hardly a nut job conspiracy theorist blowhard now is he? The price of not heeding his warnings will be far greater than the cost of preparing for the future now.

Storable food and gold are two good places to make a start.

COMMENTARY:   Gerald Celente reminds me of a fast talking Atlantic City bookie, laying odds on the Super Bowl, than a professional trends expert and visionary, but you cannot deny the accuracy of many of his predictions since he started in 1980.   

  

You don't have to be a noted economist to make these predictions.  The evidence of a U.S. financial collapse are all around us.  I have written extensively on different aspects of the U.S. and world economies, including:  

• The Real Estate Shadow Inventory. 
• Potential for a Second Real Estate Bubble and continuing real estate turmoil through at least 2015. 
• The Housing Armegeddon in 2011. 
• The Commercial Real Estate Bubble. 
• U.S. Poverty Levels. 
• The Financial Meltdown of September 8, 2008. 
• The Trade Balance Rankings (U.S. ranks dead last). 
• The potential for a Student Loan Bubble. 
• Why high unemployment due to the Great Recession has forced millions of college graduates to live with mom and dad again.
• A prediction by the head of the International Monetary Fund or IMF of a global depression due to the debt problems in the EU and U.S.

In a blog post dated July 6, 2011, titled "The Root Causes Behind Today's High Unemployment Situation, And Why This May Not Change Anytime Soon," I showed in great detail why unemployment will continue to remain high.  This is a must read for any pessimists who believe we are out of the woods.   

The symptoms are everywhere around you.  In February 2011,  I wrote about the impending Peak-Oil Crisis, a catastrophe we will all face because the demand for oil will exceed production (peak-oil). If you have noticed a rapid rise in the price of gas, that's what I am talking about. 

The Arab Spring Revolutions which erupted in North Africa and Middle East saw the overthrow of long standing dictators in Egypt, Libya and Tunisia, a bloddy revolution in Syria which continues to this day, and unrest and demonstrations in Jordan.  All of these events have created further instability in the oil rich regions of the Middle East and North Africa.

Adding fuel to the fire is the refusal of Iran to end its illegal nuclear weapons program in defiance of the U.N. and AEIA inspectors and boycott resolutions, and threats to destroy Israel and further threats to the West that it could close the Straits of Hormuz, adds further tensions and instability to the free flow of oil from the Middle East to the rest of the world.

This is not just a U.S. problem, but it is global in scale.  We all know about the financial collapse of several European countries, namely Greece, Spain, Portugal and now Italy, but major developed nations like Japan are on the brink of financial collapse.   Standard & Poors recently reduced the credit ratings of France, Greece, Spain, Portugal and Italy.  This will make it doubly difficult for these countries to raise funds and pay their longterm sovereign debt when it comes due.

In a blog post dated January 7, 2012, I told you about passage and signing by President Obama, of the National Defense Authorization Act or NDAA (H.R. bill 1540), which effectively gives the President the power to use our military in purely civilian matters.  Though the wording in the NDAA is itself torturous -- and there is a provision for a waiver from the Defense Secretary regarding mandatory military detentions -- the elasticity of words like "associated forces" and "supported" have left some civil libertarians worried that the U.S. military could be deployed domestically against people opposing future American wars against alleged "terrorists" or "terrorist states."    In effect, this new NDAA law could lead to a police state, in which you could be detained as a "person of interest" or labeled as a "traitor" simply for demonstrating against future wars.  You could be held for an indefinite period of time, denied rights of habeaus corpus and you would disappear into some detention camp never to be seen again.  Does the U.S. government believe that civil law and order will collapse during a revolution?  Why would the politicians pass such a devisive law and destroy your civil and legal rights under the U.S. Constitution unless they are planning for something?

Finally,  in a blog post dated January 9, 2012 (reposted), I told you about the booming demand for underground "Apocalypse" bunkers by the rich and powerful.  They are the so-called 1 percenters with the financial means to protect themselves in the event of a natural catastrophe, or maybe a revolution, perhaps?  These wealthy individuals are well connected and are the largest doners and supporters to both major political parties.  Why would they be willing to pay many thousands of dollars unless they knew something truly bad was about to happen?   While the 99 percenters experience an all-out revolution, these rich and powerful individuals will live in absolute luxury and comfort in plush deep underground bunkers protected from the chaos above ground.      

It does not surprise me then why Mr. Celente predicts a "violent revolution" and that "food will become more important than Christmas".   There is a lot of anger out there.  The roots for the emergence of a third party are already here.   The Tea Party could emerge as that Third Party.   The Tea Partyreflects a lot of that anger, although I don't agree with much of their radical politics, including their racism reflected in their personal hate for President Obama.   The Occupy Wall Street movement has expanded across the country.  Major demonstrations are planned in 2012 in many major cities.  

Courtesy of an article dated January 30, 2011 appearing in Before It's News

 

APPLE FINALLY DISCLOSES THE WORKING CONDITIONS AT THE PRODUCTION PLANTS OF ITS MAGICAL DEVICES AND ITS ABOUT TIME

Apple Inc. disclosed a comprehensive list of its major suppliers for the first time, along with a detailed report on factory inspections, moving to combat an array of criticism about working conditions in its supply chain and the company's transparency about it.

The report said Apple found continued problems in areas such as working hours, overtime pay and handling of hazardous waste. For example, the report said Apple's suppliers were in compliance with the company's code of a maximum of a 60-hour work week only 38% of the time. The company said factories fared better in other areas like fair treatment.

In one of his first interviews as Apple Chief Executive, Tim Cook said the Cupertino, Calif., company has long aimed to be more transparent and believes the steps it is taking—including nearly doubling the number of supplier audits it does—are "raising the bar" for the industry.

Tim Cook, Apple CEO, and previously Apple's chief operating officer who oversaw its supply chain said. 

"I have spent a lot of time in factories over my lifetime and we are clearly leading in this area.  It is like innovating in products. You can focus on things that are barriers or you can focus on scaling the wall or redefining the problem."

Apple's list of 156 companies came along with a major report—one of the company's largest ever—divulging the results of its recent factory inspections. While the company has long revealed some of its top suppliers, the new list covers those that represent 97% of its materials and manufacturing spending.

Apple Production Suppliers List 2011

Click Image To Enlarge

The list includes a range of global technology companies, such as Sony Corp. to Intel Corp., along with niche regional businesses such as Tianjin Lishen Battery Joint-Stock Co. Ltd.

 

Apple Production Supplier Report - 2012 Progress Report

View more documents from turk5555.

 

The report makes several references to one of Apple's biggest manufacturing partners, Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. The company, also known as Foxconn, combated a spate of employee suicides at a facility in Shenzen, China, in 2010 and an explosion that killed four workers at plant in Chengdu, China, last year. Apple said it has put in place new requirements for firms dealing with combustible dust.

 The report found 108 facilities didn't pay proper overtime wages and 93 facilities had records that indicated more than 50% of their workers exceeded the 60-hour work week. The audits also found 5 facilities had incidents of underage labor.

Tim Cook said.  

"Working hours is a complex issue.  I am confident the company can improve in the area by monitoring these plants at a very, very micro level.  I know this is a journey."

The report also found 24 facilities conducted pregnancy tests and 56 didn't have procedures to prevent discrimination against pregnant workers. Apple said that at its direction, the suppliers have stopped discriminatory screenings for medical conditions or pregnancy.

Mr. Cook said Apple has been sharing more of its findings about working conditions in its factories over time, but this year's update represents its most detailed. It comes as the drumbeat of criticism against practices across the company's ballooning supplier footprint has grown from prominent Chinese environmental activists and others. Many of those have taken aim at the company's prior unwillingness to disclose all the suppliers it works with.

The report said Apple has taken new steps to better monitor and improve conditions at factories, including increasing audits in Malaysia and Singapore and expanding its worker education program.

Apple said it found 112 facilities that weren't properly storing, moving or handling hazardous chemicals and 69 weren't recycling or disposing of hazardous waste as required by law, including one that had a pipe dumping waste into a nearby farm.

The Fair Labor Association, a prominent labor standards non-profit, also said that Apple would join the group, opening it up to independent monitoring.  In a statement, Apple's senior vice president of operations Jeff Williams said it was "extremely proud to be the first technology company admitted into the group."

COMMENTARY:   In a blog post dated October 12, 2011, I introduced you to Foxconn International, one of Apple's major Chinese production suppliers for the iPod, iPhone and iPad. Foxconn has been in the news quite a bit over reports of how it treats its production workers, appalling working conditions, 15-20 hour work days, and 11 employees committing suicide in 2010.  

In a blog post dated October 15, 2011, I reported that Foxconn International planned on replacing workers with one million robots over the next three years.  Rising labor rates in China are the culprit, and its better to replace human beings with robots because they don't complaint, and you can work them 24/7, 365 days a year if you need to.  Labor problems solved.

In a blog post dated November 7, 2011, I reported on the findings of China's Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs (IPE) , the equivalent of America's Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), about  dozens of heavy metal poisonings that have occurred in China since 2009.  According to the IPE, after several months investigating these environmental poisonings throughout China, Apple's suppliers came up again and again.  The head of IPE saod.  

"We found violations of wastewater standards and water pollution, air pollution, air emissions problems, and hazardous waste disposal problems.  The volume of hazardous waste generated by the supply chain is amazing.  In one case, we found that a single factory generated 110,000 tons of hazardous waste a year."

When the IPE confronted Apple directly about these violations of hazardous wastes, it refused to confirm that the guilty production suppliers even produced Apple products.  Apple has always been very secretive about its product producers, and its policy was to refuse to disclose its suppliers.  The IPE largely knew who Apple's suppliers were (from talking to locals, following delivery trucks with outgoing shipments, and monitoring media reports).  

I was so pissed off at the hazardous wastes being spewed by Apple's Chinese production suppliers into the environment, rivers and canals, that I called Apple's headquarters and was given a "no comment."  That's what prompted me to write the above blog post, and I am glad that I did.

It is apparent that IPE's aggressive investigation of Apple's Chinese production suppliers has forced Apple's hand, and the above Apple Production Supplier List for 2011 and Apple Production Supplier Report - Progress Report For 2012 are the result.

I have always been impressed with the simple, minimalist design and elegance of Apple's products. That has been its trademark and secret to success.  However, you would think that a company that prides itself on product quality would take adequate measures to insure that its production suppliers are complying with local labor laws, fair labor standards and disposing of hazardous wastes properly and taking proper measure to protect the environment against pollution.  Apple has been growing so rapidly, that it apparently ignored all these bad signals until now and the magnitude of violations listed in its Apple Production Supplier Report is clear indication of this.

Courtesy of an article dated January 13, 2012 appearing in The Wall Street Journal

MILLENNIALS ARE BRANDS, BRANDS ARE PEOPLE, BUT THAT'S NOT HOW YOU SHOULD THINK OF YOURSELF

The Business Insider Ignition conference 2011 in New York brought in its share of precocious Web natives recently liberated from MIT and other points north. But the insights came hard and fast at the event, held at the Time Warner Center in New York. The location is ironic, given the consensus among speakers and panelists that big traditional media as a monolithic network enterprise is gone, and the media is now a network of nodes comprising individuals like those walking around the streets of New York 10 stories below the conference room.

One comment came from Alex Kazim, founder and CEO of Ongo -- that $500 will soon be too much for a tablet, and that eventually the sweet spot will be $200.

"The Newton failed because the Palm Pilot was $200 and Newton, $700."

Next up was Matt Briton, CEO and founder of Mr. Youth, who spoke about the perpetually elusive Millennials, beginning with the misconception that they don't have lots of money. Well, they don't now, but they will.  He said.  

"They will have more spending power in five years than Boomers have now.  They aren't rebellious, they are humble. But the paradox is that they look at someone like Mark Zuckerberg, who created a business in a dorm room, and feel that that kind of success is achievable. They think the sky's the limit."

He said that while the class of 2010 was all about brand and bling, the class of 2015 is about showcasing your own brand and persona.

"This generation realizes that once they get out of college their resume won't be enough. They realize that their personal brand -- what they have done, what have they created, what they have they built -- is what matters."

The takeaway was that young people are becoming brands, but brands realize they must become people.

In terms of media behavior, no surprise here:

86% of Millennials are cutting the chord on cable, opting for online only.  

"The TV used to be the central place in dorm rooms." 

He said that Hulu, Netflix and YouTube have supplanted cable in media consumption among that demographic. 

Briton says brands need to address five "need states": Utility; entertainment; information; rewards; and recognition.

• Utility means creating something the Millennial generation needs (his example; Intel's "Museum of Me," which allows teens to connect a Facebook app to their profile to create a museum of their lives).
• Entertainment used to be as simple as dialing up a celebrity as a spokesperson or sponsor, but that now, celebrity could be a YouTube sensation like Kelly, picked up by Marshalls for a promotion.
• Information is "not always about product or service, but about the consumer."
• Rewards should be less about acquisition. He said.  

"Brands often try to reward for acquisition, but now brands realize they have to reward for loyalty. Doing that brings organic growth." 

• Recognition simply means spotlighting consumers' involvement in brand equity, a la Wheat Thins showing up unannounced at the house of one of the brand's social-media ambassadors  with a pallet of the crackers, and filming their response.  He said. 

"It's looking at what consumers care about and fitting in that framework." 

COMMENTARY:   Unfortunately many college graduating millennials, unless they have a full-ride scholarship or rich parents, are going to be saddled with so much college student debt (now approaching $1 trillion), that student debt will be like an anchor around the neck of many millennials well beyond five years.  For this reason, I squash any notion that millennials will have more purchasing power than Boomers.  I just don't see this happening because wages have been basically frozen, and corporations are content hiring temps and part-timers than they are full-timers.  

Things have gotten so bad, that economists have coined the term, "disposable workforce," to describe the situation. If you stop to analyze the root causes behind America's the high unemployment rate, it's structural, and there are three key job destruction forces at work including technology.  Millennials need to know these things, but you will be surprised how few do. Jobs are still hard to comeby, and roughly 40% of college grads still have not found full-time job's.

And for those of you dreaming of getting a high-tech job in Silicon Valley, the cold hard facts, there are only about 48,000 internet jobs in all of Silicon Valley.  Yeah, they pay good, if you are a software engineer, know Java or HTML5 and mobile app development, but how many apps does the world really need?  Then let's not forget the free meals and Red Bull you can drink at Facebook and Google, all of it designed to keep you at work, so you work more. I call that exploitation. 

If I were a millennial, I would stop dreaming about the quick buck, stock options and an IPO, and the ridiculous dream of ascending to something like a Mark Zuckerberg, Mark Pincus,  Lady Gaga or heaven forbid Kim Kardashian or Paris Hilton.  They are really poor examples to pattern oneself, if you ask me.  The idea of a personal brand is just self-promotionalism and a whole lot of narcissism and sensationalism.  We don't need more brands or apps or more websites, and certainly no more Mark Zuckerberg's.  We need more volunteerism and millennials with a societal mission, big vision and a knack for innovation that will bring forth the new hard core technologies that solve the real tough problems of tomorrow that will endure the test of time.  

I would love to see more math and science majors, more engineers, chemists, physicists, doctors and scientists who can make things and serve a societal purpose, and a lot less hackers.  Ask me what Facebook makes, and I am left scratching my head.  In fact, I have predicted that Facebook's ad revenue potential is really limited. It has already reached a critical inflection point,  The same goes for Twitter, Zynga, LinkedIn or anything social.   It has a cap on it, and it is  60% there already for a lot of these social startups.  I often joke that if Facebook went out of business tomorrow, the only thing left would be lots of servers and office furniture. We would never miss Zuck and his hackers. Employers believe social networks are the biggest time suck ever. 50% of employers ban them on the job.  Tell me I am wrong.  If Chevron, AT&T, Microsoft or Apple disappeared tomorrow. We would definitely miss them.  Think about what I just said. Always ask, "What do they make?"

I am not trying to create a Boomer vs Millennial clash here, but knock some sense into all Millennials reading this. Ask yourself. What does that company make that will endure the test of time.  If connecting and sharing is what the world needs, I would just stick to my blogging and with email and txt messages, and engage with real people you know trust and are really close to you. Besides, there are a whole lot less privacy issues with email and txt messages.  Facebook is now on a 20-year probation including annual privacy audits by the FTC for for numerous privacy violations.  Yeah, Google and Twitter, too.  Did you know that your social media posts could get you fired or prevent you from getting a job? Even scarier, Facebook has become the new Big Brother, and is now under tight control of the CIA, FBI and NSA, and I am not kidding about that. Zuck is now Big Brother.  Do you really want that?

I don't want to come off as being against digital technology, Web 2.0 or social media.  They have their role.  Certainly the Spring Revolution in the Arab Middle East has lived on due to social media and the internet.  It represents an extension of our freedom of speech, but just be careful what you say (see above).  Personally, I am too old to give a shit, I view myself as on a mission to spread the truth, inform and educate you.  Millennials can be haunted by what they did or said on the internet for years, and I have seen some of the shit millennials post online, and it grosses me out sometimes. 

So there it is, all laid out for you.  The future is in your hands.  Go my darlings and meet the real challenges of tomorrow. 

Courtesy of an article dated November 30, 2011 appearing in MediaPost Publications Marketing Daily

 

HOW THE GREAT RECESSION AND LACK OF JOBS HAS FORCED 6 MILLION COLLEGE GRADS TO LIVE WITH MOM AND DAD, AND HOW THEY ARE COPING

Many young adults find themselves still tethered to the Bank of Mom and Dad, and that dependence is taking a toll.

Kevin Davis moved back home last December after receiving a business finance degree from the University of North Carolina. He has yet to land a full-time job.

The 25-year-old often commiserates with his father, John, an information-technology professional who was laid off as a project manager in October 2010 for the second time since 2007. John Davis, a resident of Winston-Salem, N.C., who currently receives unemployment insurance says.

"At times, it's hard for me to keep up my own spirits as well as Kevin's." 

As recent college graduates scramble to find full-time jobs, numerous parents are helping their children pay bills or letting them live at home again.

The Dilemna for the Parents:

About 59% of parents provide or recently provided financial assistance to children aged 18 to 39 who weren't students, concluded a May survey of nearly 1,100 people by the National Endowment for Financial Education.

The Dilemna for the Students:

According to Census data, 5.9 million Americans between 25 and 34 years of age—nearly a quarter of whom have bachelor's degrees—live with their parents, a significant increase from 4.7 million before the recession.

But many parents can't afford the extra expense.

• 26% of those polled by the nonprofit group took on more debt to help their offspring. 
• 13% delayed a planned life event such as a home purchase. 
• 7% postponed retirement.

Compounding the problem is the fact that certain parents are crowding the younger generation out of the job market because their support of their grown kids means they can't afford to retire.

 

Kevin, a licensed pilot with aspirations to run an airport, says he knows someone more than twice his age who beat him for an airport managerial post this summer because the older man had more experience.

The strain of joblessness and continued financial support for Kevin—which his father estimates costs $300 a month, or 18% of the family's living expenses—have exhausted his parents' savings and forced the 61-year-old Mr. Davis and his wife, Donna, a 54-year-old teacher's assistant, to start spending money from their retirement accounts.

Mr. Davis says.

"Short of winning the lottery, I don't know when I will be able to retire."  

And he says his wife "probably will never retire."

Click Image To View Interactive Slideshow

NEFE President Ted Beck.

"If the economy remains weak, you may see more parents sacrificing their financial health for their struggling adult offspring."

Personal trainer Debra Jacobson shares her Jupiter, Fla., home with two adult daughters and a teenaged one.

Faith Jacobson, center, with her mother, Debra, and father, Jerry, at her dad's home. She splits her time between her parents' residences.

The 60-year-old divorced mother says.  

"I can't afford home insurance or health coverage because I am supporting these three daughters with food and a roof over their heads."

She figures that costs around $600 a month.

Faith, 23, has split her time between her mom's and dad's residences since she graduated in August 2010 with a communications degree from the University of South Florida. She is trying to repay about $23,000 in college debt with the money she earns as a part-time bartender.  She says.

"I want to be a TV journalist or professional singer, but there aren't many opportunities here." 

Her older sister, Jackie, who is 26 and teaches part-time, owes about $60,000 on the loans she took out to get her mechanical-engineering and math degrees. She says of living with her mother.

"I feel like a burden.  What is there to be proud of?"

Ms. Jacobson, meanwhile, says she regrets that Faith and Jackie had to borrow so heavily for college. As parents, she says,

"Our job was to pay for their education. They should not have debts they can't pay."

Click To View Interactive Slideshow

Young graduates' protracted dependency can be emotionally draining, too.   Cliff Zukin, a Rutgers University professor of public policy and political science says.

"Parents feel upset when their adult child can't get the kind of job that he or she wanted because they raised them to believe 'you can do anything you want.'"

Some worried mothers and fathers have become closely involved in the employment searches of their adult offspring.

Damian Birkel, founder of Professionals in Transition, a support group in Winston-Salem says.

"Parents want to get on with their own lives and regain the privacy they have lost from sharing their empty nest with grown offspring." 

Click Image To View Interactive Chart

So far this year, staffers at GoliathJobs.com, which operates free websites for college students and boomers, have counseled more than 2,500 parents seeking job-hunting help for their kids right before or after their children graduated, reports founder David Mezzapelle. That's up from 150 calls in 2007.

Marcia Reinhard, youth director for the Jewish Federation of Eastern Connecticut, typifies such parents. Her son Jake returned home to Mystic, Conn., right after completing a psychology degree at Adelphi University last spring, and he is costing his parents around $200 a month.

Ms. Reinhard doesn't view her son's return as an inconvenience.  She recollects that she grew frustrated and often lost sleep when he didn't look for work.  

"He rarely spent hours at a time looking for work.  The next thing you know, you are arguing."

Constant reminders about whether he was pursuing enough job leads bothered 22-year-old Jake. "I am already on it," he recalls telling his parents.    He says.  

"Then Mom would forget and start reminding him again." 

In the end, his mother's intense networking helped him land a position as a $12.75-an-hour residential aide at Waterford Country School, a facility for disturbed youngsters. He expects to start the job soon.

Once he's working full-time, he'll live at home for a year so he can begin repaying his $20,000 in college debt, say his parents, who plan to charge him $100 a month in rent.

But Jake has different plans and says:

"If I am going to pay the rent, I might as well move out of the house."

COMMENTARY:   The Great Recession has taught parents a very valuable lesson, and that is that their jobs as parents is almost never ending.  It doesn't stop when the kids are "out of the nest" or finish college.  And very few knew of them know just how deep and long lasting the Great Recession has lasted, and very few understand the permanent structural effects to the economy that make job hunting so frustrating, and often impossible, for the next generation and older generation of workers. 

Americans grew accustomed to an unemployment rate of 6% or "full employment," not the nearly 10% unemployment rate we have experienced since the end of 2010.  There are a lot of reasons for this, but there are three principal "job destruction forces" that have contributed to the chronic high unemployment rates we now experience.  You can read about this in my blog post of November 5, 2011.

Another factor that looms large, is the ever rising debt that students piled up just to earn that college degree, only to discover that jobs in their chosen fields were far and in between.   Outstanding studen loans now total nearly $1 trillion and rising. Many students were counting on full-time jobs after graduation to make it possible for them to begin repaying their studen loans. However, that task is becoming ever more difficult for many college grads, and the number of student loan defaults, are on the rise.  You can read about this in my blog posts dated December 22, 2010 and September 20, 2011.   

Courtesy of an article dated November 10, 2011 appearing in The Wall Street Journal