An article in the Financial Times (Lawyers use Facebook to serve papers) reports that an Australian lawyer received permission from a local court to serve papers using Facebook social network. It seems that Mr. McCormack, the Canberra solicitor, had been unable to track down his victims in more traditional ways. The article also notes that there have been occasions when papers have been served by email and text messaging for those who were illusive. Mr McCormack used an email address to locate the couple who was in default on their home loan. From the article:
Facebook, whose 140m active users make it the world’s most popular social networking site, said users could adjust optional privacy settings to prevent anyone from outside their personal network contacting them, a move that would close off a legal manoeuvre such as Mr McCormack’s.
While these events raise issues about privacy, legality, and even the appropriateness of delivering difficult information using media, the spreading use of social media networks and other forms of new media communication make it important to think about it from the perspective of the new media user. Just because a traditional media user wouldn’t consider looking for someone on Facebook, MySpace or Twitter, doesn’t mean there is anything wrong with those methods of communication. At the same time, we need to be mindful of the potential generation gap in media technology users so that the conversations (no pun intended) stay focused on the function and not the form of communication. It’s more important that people connect, than how people connect.
Dr. Pamela Rutledge is available to reporters for comments on the psychological and social impact of media and technology on individuals, society, organizations and brands.