The Hidden Resume: How Social Media Screening Impacts Job-Hunting

Screening applicants’ social media profiles is now a standard step in the HR pipeline.

According to research, most employers (90%) factor job candidates’ social media accounts into their hiring decisions. 79% have rejected a candidate because of content on social media. 1

Hiring managers aren’t just checking people’s accounts on their own, either. More and more, application forms include prompts that ask for direct links to candidates’ profiles.

Users on online forums like Reddit’s r/recruitinghell have shared recent encounters with this trend:

Some people have reported being rejected for refusing to provide their social media accounts, which prompted discussions about workarounds, including outright lying about not being on social media, setting one’s accounts to private, or having “professional decoy” alternate accounts.

Despite social media screening now being common, the practice doesn’t gel with some modern workers’ expectation of strict work-life separation and privacy.

How do people feel about social media screening?

Opinions are split on whether companies are justified in using this as part of a background check.

In Stoddard’s case, some of her fans and commenters claimed it was too far for a company to rescind an offer over a post where she was clad in “probably more clothes than most people in their bikini summer shoots.”

People are “brainwashed by corporate jobs to think they can’t have self-expression,” commented one user under her video.

Others felt the company had no choice. “Your social media is a billboard for you,” another user said. “Companies are having to start doing this, and I don’t blame them. People need to stop oversharing or go private.”

Potential middle ground

Some believe social media screening shouldn’t be ubiquitous, but that it’s a reasonable practice for those who are applying to serve as the “face” of their company, such as those in public relations roles.

Others say there should be limits on which accounts employers view.

“Asking for a LinkedIn account or other sites that demonstrate professional experience … is not unusual or inappropriate,” one Redditor wrote. “Asking for personal social media accounts is highly problematic and a giant red flag.”

Some hiring managers believe vetting social media profiles is a necessary part of background screening. Essentially, if they can find something “inappropriate” on your feed, then a customer, client, or shareholder could as well, which could affect the company’s reputation and bottom line.

Part of the goal is often to find red flags that a traditional interview process might miss, such as evidence of drug use, discriminatory language or extremist political views, or a habit of “bad-mouthing” previous employers.

Social media posts can also give employers a sense of how you’d fit in with the team.

Companies use social media to avoid risky interview questions

In one study, nearly 68% of hiring managers said they also used social media to find the answers to legally risky or flat-out illegal interview questions, such as an applicant’s age (37%) or gender identity (19%). 2

Companies also looked for applicants’:

• Political views (26%)
• Marital status (19%)
• Race or ethnicity (17%)
• Disability status (17%)
• Sexual orientation (11%)
• Religion (11%)
• Pregnancy status (9%)

With the exception of political ideology, it’s illegal in most of the US for prospective employers to factor these characteristics into hiring decisions.

According to the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), if employers ask you questions about these legally protected characteristics, it “may be considered evidence of intent to discriminate,” which opens them up to legal liability. 3 4

Critics of social media screening point out that it can be a way for a company to investigate candidates’ potential membership in protected groups without doing anything legally actionable in an interview.

Employers can reject you for almost any reason, including poor culture fit, lack of experience, or mismatched salary expectations. However, you can potentially sue if they reject you based on illegal discrimination, even if they used information found on your social media.

The key, of course, is that you have to be able to prove it to a reasonable standard.

In one recent lawsuit, for example, a candidate sued after not being hired for a position he was qualified for. In his case, a court found that his rejection might have been illegally motivated by religious discrimination after the hiring managers discovered his website containing his religious views (questioning evolution).

However, in many cases, discrimination is hard to prove in court, as it’s easy for a hiring manager to claim they had a different reason for rejecting an application. If you think you might have been subject to illegal employment discrimination, speak with an attorney who specializes in this area.

Companies most often draw a line on employee social media posts when they breach confidentiality, violate anti-discrimination laws, disparage coworkers, or risk directly damaging the business’s reputation.

While these are the most obvious scenarios, other situations aren’t so clear-cut.

In Stoddard’s case, she considered her post an act of self-expression. However, her manager allegedly didn’t want clients seeing her “in a certain light.”

“I understand if I was saying some racist stuff or making very threatening types of content, but no, it’s my self-expression,” Stoddard said.

While most would argue that body positivity shouldn’t be a fireable offense, “lack of professionalism” is a broad umbrella that many companies use to filter out anyone who doesn’t fit their specific corporate mold.

If you are currently on a job hunt—or even if you’re comfortably employed—it’s worth performing a “digital audit” of your profiles. While you shouldn’t have to erase your personality, there are certain things that most companies see as red flags:

• Complaints about former bosses or coworkers
• Evidence of illegal acts or substance use
• Highly aggressive political vitriol
• Confidential information (e.g., if you posted a “day in the life” video that accidentally showed a company spreadsheet)
• Polarizing “lifestyle” content (e.g., boudoir photos)

Some workers also warn about posts that may flag you as not being a culture fit.

For example, one Reddit user wrote that they suspected they’d been rejected from a prestige consulting firm due to having “too much socialist SJWism” on their LinkedIn profile.

The “SJW” (social justice warrior) content reportedly included posts covering workplace advocacy and labor rights, being neurodivergent in the office, and polarizing industry topics like ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) ratings.

While they couldn’t verify exactly what it was that was flagged, users pointed out that if you have public social media profiles, especially ones that are tied to your career (like LinkedIn), posting anything political or deeply personal isn’t usually a good idea.

“Keep it strictly business,” one user wrote. “Never personal. Never political. Never critical.”