By the late 2000s, tech-scene employers saw social media absence as disqualifying

Evidence

Lifestreaming is a normal part of the technology scene. People expect their friends to be familiar with the latest social media applications and to connect and engage using blogs, Twitter, and Face-book. As Auren Hoffman, CEO of the reputation management firm RapLeaf, stated in our interview: “If you were an employer, and someone applied and they didn’t have any activity on social networks and that person was 23 years old, you’d think they were the Unabomber. You would be really scared to meet this person without even a bodyguard. I don’t even know if that person exists.” To people like Hoffman who are intimately familiar with Web 2.0 technology, not using social media marked unsophistication and backwardness. In Hoffman’s view, the relationship of employer and worker requires the familiarity of common social ties and community involvement; nonparticipation would not only make it difficult to contribute to social and technological conversations, but also potentially limit one’s economic mobility. — Alice E. Marwick, Status Update, 552

Categorization

• SHARE: The RapLeaf CEO quote that a 23-year-old applicant with no social activity is ‘the Unabomber’ is a striking period artifact worth sending to anyone working on social media history.
• SEED: Angle for an essay: how non-participation shifted from acceptable to disqualifying within tech employment — the coercive walled-garden of ‘having to be findable online.’
• ADDENDUM: Grafts onto the labor and infrastructure themes — social media as mandatory infrastructure for economic mobility rather than optional leisure.
• XREF: connects to: Early social media companies blurred the boundary between work and personal life — Alice E. Marwick, Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity,…, 12