246 Ethics in Higher Education: Values-driven Leaders for the Future
friends, family, coworkers and acquaintances within the same category
of “friend” or “follower”. This levelling of traditional social hierarchies
poses a variety of ethical and moral dilemmas for both users and
employers.
For example, future employers can and do access the social media
profiles of potential job seekers and make judgements on their eligibility
for positions based on the content that they encounter (NACE 2012).
The same applies to social media “friendships” and “relationships”
between professionals that could be, and sometimes are, construed as
being in conflict with professional ethos and practice (Madell 2016, cf.
Marwick & Boyd 2011). Contractual and business relationships have
also been affected. For example, the Code of ethics and conduct for
South African print and online media (2106) and the South African
Labour Guide (2106) offer guidelines on ethical social media conduct
and practice, but these remain guidelines, which are difficult to apply
consistently and to sanction, if necessary, in a swiftly changing
environment.
However, in South Africa, posts on social media have legal effect.
Pistorius (2016) cites the case of Sihlali v SA Broadcasting Corporation
Ltd [2010] 5 BLLR 542 (LC) where an SMS was accepted as a letter of
resignation and in Jafta v Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife [2008] 10 BLLR 954
(LC), the court held that Jafta’s email constituted valid acceptance of the
job offer, that an SMS is as effective a mode of communication as any
written document or e-mail, and that Jafta did communicate his
acceptance of a job offer via SMS. Derogatory comments made on
Facebook may also provide a fair reason for dismissal, for example
Sedick & another v Krisray (Pty) Ltd (2011) 8 BLLR 979 (CCMA) and
Fredericks v Jo Barkett Fashions [2011] JOL 27923 (CCMA).
It is also interesting to note that South Africa courts consider social
media and acceptable form of legal service in appropriate circumstances.