Hello, this is Social Media Attorney Mark Fiedelholtz. Boilerplate policies that contain vague language and are overlooking hidden liabilities in the new social media laws won't hold up in court.The next generation social media policies must be written with great precision. Only a skilled Social Media Attorney can update your policy.
Questions? Call 954-748-7698
Courts Reject 99% Of Social Media Policies
Due To 3 New Laws...
Law #1: Don't Use Model Policies, Even From Reputable Sources. They Contain Vague Language That Courts Reject.
In-house attorneys and communication professionals are using vague model policy language from online sources and even reputable associations that don't comply with the U.S. Supreme Court "operational realities" standard.

This legal standard requires electronic policies to reflect the conditions and culture of your organization, not another organization. For instance, your office architecture may have may have open cubicles which affords a lesser standard of an expectation of privacy. But, the privacy policies in the model policy you copied gave employees a higher expectation of privacy because it was based on an office with closed doors, not open cubicles. This incongruity is revealed in a lawsuit and creates a costly defect in your social media policy. In general, courts find model policy language too broad and sweeping; this is especially true regarding prior restraint of an employee's First Amendment speech rights.

The constitutional alarm bells go off in a judge's head when they rea d this type of vague and overbroad policy language. And, now the bells ring louder with the recent U.S. Supreme Court and federal social media laws on "free speech" in the workplace.

When employees are fired or disciplined, they hire aggressive attorneys that uncover and exploit these hidden policy gaps to win $500,000+ legal damages. You must have a social media law expert draft from scratch or update your social media policy language to comply with the new federal standards and train your staff.
Law #2: Courts Now View Social Media Policies As Specialized Legal Instruments, Not
PR or Marketing Documents.
A few years ago, the social media policy was viewed as a communication document that could be written by a PR professional or general in-house attorney, not anymore.

Courts now classify social media policies as high liability legal instruments that can greatly impact the constitutional rights of others.

Therefore, courts consider it "deliberate indifference" when you knew or should have known that your in-house attorney doesn't specialize in social media and you still refused to hire an outside social media attorney to update your policy.

Being an attorney doesn't qualify you to write a social media policy.
That is why most in-house attorneys are now seeking media law attorneys who specialize in social media and digital media law.

Here's a simple analogy, when you have a heart problem, you seek help from an experienced cardiologist, not a podiatrist. Today's lawyers are specialists.

Since social media policies and employee training require specialized legal skills and knowledge, you must prove in court that your policy drafter was an experienced media law attorney that possessed specialized skills to draft social media and digital media law. Courts won't accept any excuses.

Courts frown on general attorneys or non-lawyers drafting policies and training employees in high liability areas where a person's constitutional rights could be violated.

Don't place non-lawyers (i.e. PR, HR) in legal jeopardy by asking them to write a social media policy or teach social media law. They face too much exposure of being accused of engaging in the unlicensed practice of law which is a felony in most states.
Law #3: Courts Classify Employees Using Social Media As Broadcasters And Publishers On
High Risk Social Media Platforms
The U.S. Supreme Court and federal courts have classified employees using social media as broadcasters and publishers using high risk platforms.

Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court has also stated that you must provide specialized training, not superficial training, to enforce a policy on a high liability issue. Without documented training on the new social media laws by an outside social media law expert, your social media policy will fail in court.
Legal Authority: See Liverman v. City of Petersburg 844 F. 3d 400, inadequate training standard under 42 USCS 1983, City of Canton Ohio v. Harris 489 U.S. 378 (1989), Packingham v. North Carolina 137 S.Ct. 1730 (2017), Riley v. California 134 S.Ct. 2473 (2014) City of Ontario, California v. Quon 560 U.S. 746 (2010) 42 USCS 1983
"Mark, excellent course. The risks are too high to
use social media without this type of expert training."

- Philip B. Williams, Assistant Sheriff, Orange County, FL
In-House Attorneys, HR, and PR Trust My 30 Years
Of Digital Media Law Expertise To Close Hidden
Social Media Policy and Training Gaps
Academic Credentials
  • Florida Bar Member
  • Juris Doctorate, St Thomas U, Miami, FL
  • Masters Public Administration, American U, D.C.
  • Bachelors Political Science, American U, D.C.

Digital Media Practical Experience
  • Media Law Trainer 30 Years
  • Trained 100,000+ Professionals
  • Fmr. Television Anchor
  • White House Reporter
Questions? Call 954748-7698
Social Media Attorney Mark Fiedelholtz | 954-748-7698 | mark@newsocialmedialaw.com