IndyBar Adopts Policy on Social Media

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

More and more social media is being used as not just a personal form of communication, but as professional communication, as well. Recognizing the need to interact with its large membership, the Indianapolis Bar Association established a presence on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn. As the use of this communication has grown, so has the need for guidelines for bar leaders, staff and members. At its March meeting, the IndyBar Board of Directors adopted a formal policy which is reprinted here.

The Indianapolis Bar Association (“IndyBar”) recognizes that social media is an important tool in an association committed to meeting the present and future needs of its members. The IndyBar further recognizes that it is prudent to adopt policies and best practices as it pertains to social media and social networking. The following guidelines will be used by the IndyBar in its use of social media resources.

1. Social media tools are used to promote IndyBar programs and initiatives, including member events and public services. Content should not promote political, religious or social issues unless these issues are addressed in a formal position adopted by the IndyBar Board of Directors.

2. Any member of the public may become a follower or fan of the IndyBar’s social networking sites. These sites may be created to allow followers or fans to post comments. In its sole discretion, the IndyBar has the right but not the obligation to delete comments deemed inappropriate or to block a fan or follower. The purpose of this policy is to allow the most efficient means of monitoring content and upholding the reputation of the Bar and the integrity of the sites.

3. The IndyBar will maintain one official presence on any social networking site in order to maintain control of content, provide for the most effective use of staff time and avoid confusion over what is deemed the official Bar message. Bar Sections, Committees, Divisions, and Task Forces are encouraged to submit appropriate information through communication with their Bar staff liaisons. Approval for new accounts must be sought from the Board. As of the date of this Policy, the Law Student Division maintains a separate social networking site, the existence of which is both approved by this Board and subject to all other applicable policies set forth herein.

4. The information on IndyBar social networking sites should be professional in nature and regularly updated with postings on Bar events and news. Official site content such as logo and mission will be updated only as needed and approved by the Board.

5. Unless previously approved for publication in another format, unofficial photos and videos will not be posted unless permission is obtained from the individuals appearing in them. Members may be asked to sign a photo release form at Bar events in order to streamline posting procedures.

6. Site administration, including set up, content development and management, and promulgation of rules of etiquette with respect to IBA social media are the responsibility of the IndyBar staff with input from members with regard to the information posted.

How long before you “friend”, “tweet” or “link up” with the Bar?•


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. If a class action suit or other manner of retribution is possible, count me in. I have email and voicemail from the man. He colluded with opposing counsel, I am certain. My case was damaged so severely it nearly lost me everything and I am still paying dearly.

  2. There's probably a lot of blame that can be cast around for Indiana Tech's abysmal bar passage rate this last February. The folks who decided that Indiana, a state with roughly 16,000 to 18,000 attorneys, needs a fifth law school need to question the motives that drove their support of this project. Others, who have been "strong supporters" of the law school, should likewise ask themselves why they believe this institution should be supported. Is it because it fills some real need in the state? Or is it, instead, nothing more than a resume builder for those who teach there part-time? And others who make excuses for the students' poor performance, especially those who offer nothing more than conspiracy theories to back up their claims--who are they helping? What evidence do they have to support their posturing? Ultimately, though, like most everything in life, whether one succeeds or fails is entirely within one's own hands. At least one student from Indiana Tech proved this when he/she took and passed the February bar. A second Indiana Tech student proved this when they took the bar in another state and passed. As for the remaining 9 who took the bar and didn't pass (apparently, one of the students successfully appealed his/her original score), it's now up to them (and nobody else) to ensure that they pass on their second attempt. These folks should feel no shame; many currently successful practicing attorneys failed the bar exam on their first try. These same attorneys picked themselves up, dusted themselves off, and got back to the rigorous study needed to ensure they would pass on their second go 'round. This is what the Indiana Tech students who didn't pass the first time need to do. Of course, none of this answers such questions as whether Indiana Tech should be accredited by the ABA, whether the school should keep its doors open, or, most importantly, whether it should have even opened its doors in the first place. Those who promoted the idea of a fifth law school in Indiana need to do a lot of soul-searching regarding their decisions. These same people should never be allowed, again, to have a say about the future of legal education in this state or anywhere else. Indiana already has four law schools. That's probably one more than it really needs. But it's more than enough.

  3. This man Steve Hubbard goes on any online post or forum he can find and tries to push his company. He said court reporters would be obsolete a few years ago, yet here we are. How does he have time to search out every single post about court reporters and even spy in private court reporting forums if his company is so successful???? Dude, get a life. And back to what this post was about, I agree that some national firms cause a huge problem.

  4. rensselaer imdiana is doing same thing to children from the judge to attorney and dfs staff they need to be investigated as well

  5. Sex offenders are victims twice, once when they are molested as kids, and again when they repeat the behavior, you never see money spent on helping them do you. That's why this circle continues