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

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. Such things are no more elections than those in the late, unlamented Soviet Union.

  2. It appears the police and prosecutors are allowed to change the rules halfway through the game to suit themselves. I am surprised that the congress has not yet eliminated the right to a trial in cases involving any type of forensic evidence. That would suit their foolish law and order police state views. I say we eliminate the statute of limitations for crimes committed by members of congress and other government employees. Of course they would never do that. They are all corrupt cowards!!!

  3. Poor Judge Brown probably thought that by slavishly serving the godz of the age her violations of 18th century concepts like due process and the rule of law would be overlooked. Mayhaps she was merely a Judge ahead of her time?

  4. in a lawyer discipline case Judge Brown, now removed, was presiding over a hearing about a lawyer accused of the supposedly heinous ethical violation of saying the words "Illegal immigrant." (IN re Barker) http://www.in.gov/judiciary/files/order-discipline-2013-55S00-1008-DI-429.pdf .... I wonder if when we compare the egregious violations of due process by Judge Brown, to her chiding of another lawyer for politically incorrectness, if there are any conclusions to be drawn about what kind of person, what kind of judge, what kind of apparatchik, is busy implementing the agenda of political correctness and making off-limits legit advocacy about an adverse party in a suit whose illegal alien status is relevant? I am just asking the question, the reader can make own conclsuion. Oh wait-- did I use the wrong adjective-- let me rephrase that, um undocumented alien?

  5. of course the bigger questions of whether or not the people want to pay for ANY bussing is off limits, due to the Supreme Court protecting the people from DEMOCRACY. Several decades hence from desegregation and bussing plans and we STILL need to be taking all this taxpayer money to combat mostly-imagined "discrimination" in the most obviously failed social program of the postwar period.

ADVERTISEMENT