A recent survey on careerbuilder has unearthed some rather sinister findings. 22% of resourcers in the US are browsing candidates’ profiles on social networking sites to supplement any traditional background investigation. More vitally, 34% of them actually dismissed the idea of moving the recruitment process on based on the content they discovered.
A few topline numbers -

41% - candidate posted information about them drinking or using drugs
40% - candidate posted provocative or inappropriate photographs or information
29% - candidate had poor communication skills
28% - candidate bad-mouthed their previous company or fellow employee
27% - candidate lied about qualifications
22% - candidate used discriminatory remarks related to race, gender, religion, etc.
22% - candidate’s screen name was unprofessional
21% - candidate was linked to criminal behavior
19% - candidate shared confidential information from previous employers

The facts unearth a real can of worms. Consent forms usually allow employers the right to use a third-party to perform a criminal and credit check. US law states that it’s OK for employers to conduct background checks themselves, as long as they’re not using a third-party. Apparently though it’s illegal for the employer to create an alias in order to access profiles. Chiefly, there are also growing fears that profiles could support a whole ton of discriminatory hiring litigation. Time for some common-sense advice and legal reporting from the powers that be at the CIPD? I’d say so.