ILNews

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?•

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. The appellate court just said doctors can be sued for reporting child abuse. The most dangerous form of child abuse with the highest mortality rate of any form of child abuse (between 6% and 9% according to the below listed studies). Now doctors will be far less likely to report this form of dangerous child abuse in Indiana. If you want to know what this is, google the names Lacey Spears, Julie Conley (and look at what happened when uninformed judges returned that child against medical advice), Hope Ybarra, and Dixie Blanchard. Here is some really good reporting on what this allegation was: http://media.star-telegram.com/Munchausenmoms/ Here are the two research papers: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0145213487900810 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213403000309 25% of sibling are dead in that second study. 25%!!! Unbelievable ruling. Chilling. Wrong.

  2. MELISA EVA VALUE INVESTMENT Greetings to you from Melisa Eva Value Investment. We offer Business and Personal loans, it is quick and easy and hence can be availed without any hassle. We do not ask for any collateral or guarantors while approving these loans and hence these loans require minimum documentation. We offer great and competitive interest rates of 2% which do not weigh you down too much. These loans have a comfortable pay-back period. Apply today by contacting us on E-mail: melisaeva9@gmail.com WE DO NOT ASK FOR AN UPFRONT FEE. BEWARE OF SCAMMERS AND ONLINE FRAUD.

  3. Mr. Levin says that the BMV engaged in misconduct--that the BMV (or, rather, someone in the BMV) knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged fees but did nothing to correct the situation. Such misconduct, whether engaged in by one individual or by a group, is called theft (defined as knowingly or intentionally exerting unauthorized control over the property of another person with the intent to deprive the other person of the property's value or use). Theft is a crime in Indiana (as it still is in most of the civilized world). One wonders, then, why there have been no criminal prosecutions of BMV officials for this theft? Government misconduct doesn't occur in a vacuum. An individual who works for or oversees a government agency is responsible for the misconduct. In this instance, somebody (or somebodies) with the BMV, at some time, knew Indiana motorists were being overcharged. What's more, this person (or these people), even after having the error of their ways pointed out to them, did nothing to fix the problem. Instead, the overcharges continued. Thus, the taxpayers of Indiana are also on the hook for the millions of dollars in attorneys fees (for both sides; the BMV didn't see fit to avail itself of the services of a lawyer employed by the state government) that had to be spent in order to finally convince the BMV that stealing money from Indiana motorists was a bad thing. Given that the BMV official(s) responsible for this crime continued their misconduct, covered it up, and never did anything until the agency reached an agreeable settlement, it seems the statute of limitations for prosecuting these folks has not yet run. I hope our Attorney General is paying attention to this fiasco and is seriously considering prosecution. Indiana, the state that works . . . for thieves.

  4. I'm glad that attorney Carl Hayes, who represented the BMV in this case, is able to say that his client "is pleased to have resolved the issue". Everyone makes mistakes, even bureaucratic behemoths like Indiana's BMV. So to some extent we need to be forgiving of such mistakes. But when those mistakes are going to cost Indiana taxpayers millions of dollars to rectify (because neither plaintiff's counsel nor Mr. Hayes gave freely of their services, and the BMV, being a state-funded agency, relies on taxpayer dollars to pay these attorneys their fees), the agency doesn't have a right to feel "pleased to have resolved the issue". One is left wondering why the BMV feels so pleased with this resolution? The magnitude of the agency's overcharges might suggest to some that, perhaps, these errors were more than mere oversight. Could this be why the agency is so "pleased" with this resolution? Will Indiana motorists ever be assured that the culture of incompetence (if not worse) that the BMV seems to have fostered is no longer the status quo? Or will even more "overcharges" and lawsuits result? It's fairly obvious who is really "pleased to have resolved the issue", and it's not Indiana's taxpayers who are on the hook for the legal fees generated in these cases.

  5. From the article's fourth paragraph: "Her work underscores the blurry lines in Russia between the government and businesses . . ." Obviously, the author of this piece doesn't pay much attention to the "blurry lines" between government and businesses that exist in the United States. And I'm not talking only about Trump's alleged conflicts of interest. When lobbyists for major industries (pharmaceutical, petroleum, insurance, etc) have greater access to this country's elected representatives than do everyday individuals (i.e., voters), then I would say that the lines between government and business in the United States are just as blurry, if not more so, than in Russia.

ADVERTISEMENT