Fordham University Social Network Policy

Statement of Intent

Fordham University looks for to foster robust and civil discourse, and to promote scholastic liberty on all University owned social media channels. Absolutely nothing in the policy below should be construed as constraining speech on non-University social networks, nor other non-University print, broadcast, nor digital channels.

Applicability and Scope

This policy details the appropriate usage of social networks for the official company purposes of Fordham University, including the promo of the University, colleges and schools, departments and workplaces, programming, professors, and staff of the University. (See the section “Authorities Fordham Social Media Account Recognition” below for the definition of official University accounts.)

For the purpose of this policy, “social networks” describes, but is not restricted to blogs (i.e., web-based journals) and microblogs (e.g., Tumblr), collaborative sites (e.g., Wikipedia, and so on), message boards, social networking sites (e.g., Facebook, Twitter), podcasts (i.e., multimedia distributed online), video sharing (e.g., YouTube), and image sharing (e.g., Instagram, Snapchat, etc.).

This policy applies to all University workers, consisting of faculty and personnel, and to anyone publishing content and remarks to any official Fordham site. The Office of University Communications is accountable for the enforcement of this policy and is a resource to the University community for launching social media initiatives. This policy does not prevent more restrictive policies for scholastic or administrative units that have various needs.

Any questions regarding this policy or Fordham’s social media presence might be addressed to:

Office of University Communications
( 212) 636-6538|

Material Guidelines

Fordham University values robust and civil discourse, and seeks to promote academic liberty. We welcome critical posts and opposing points of view, but users shall avoid using profanity and from making personal attacks in any comments published to University social media platforms.

As Fordham’s social media platforms are integral parts of its marketing and public relations efforts, the University reserves the right to moderate comments without prior alert as part of its standard editorial practices. We delete remarks which contain individual attacks, profane, harassing, or threatening language, and ban users who breach these terms, except where such actions infringe upon worker rights under the National Labor Relations Act. As a guideline, we erase comments that are plainly off-topic, as well as marketing and solicitations for non-Fordham events, products, companies, and fundraisers.

The University presumes no responsibility for user comments, screen names, nor any details they post. Third-party material shared on Fordham social networks platforms does not make up an endorsement, nor show the views of Fordham University. User accounts followed by official Fordham platforms do not make up endorsements of those users, nor of the material they publish. The use of Fordham University logos and wordmarks is limited to main University accounts (see below).

Users who publish to official University social networks platforms grant enable Fordham to use such content for marketing and advertising functions.

We hope that visitors to Fordham’s social media pages will help us maintain an open and collegial environment.

Reporting Standards

If you see content or discuss Fordham social media pages that raise concerns about an individual’s security or the safety of the University neighborhood, call the Department of Public Safety at (718) 817-2222, and ask to speak to a duty supervisor (this line is staffed 24/7).

For comments that appear to violate Fordham’s social media policy, or the, but do not rise to the level of a hazard to the University community or property, please email us at: (we will usually react within 24 hr– nights, weekends, and vacations consisted of).

Official Fordham Social Network Account Recognition

This refers to accounts created with the approval of the scholastic or administrative department in cooperation with University Communications for the function of promoting the University and its constituent departments and programs.

Individuals and groups not straight employed by Fordham and licensed by the proper University authorities might not represent themselves as main Fordham accounts, nor may they incorrectly use Fordham logo designs, seals, nor wordmarks to identify those accounts.

Before establishing any social networks accounts for main Fordham service, users should look for approval and guidance from the Office of University Communications.

Formally recognized Fordham-affiliated social media pages need to be signed up with the assistant director of communications for social media (), consisting of any page in flow at the time of this policy’s approval, or future pages. The “owner” of the platform need to be a full-time professors member or worker of the University; at least another person in the account owner’s department (or in University Communications) must have access to the account login information and password. That 2nd person needs to also be a full-time professors member or employee of the University.

Only social media pages officially recognized by Fordham will be consisted of in the official and be allowed to utilize main Fordham-branded graphics, images, and other digital possessions, as supplied by University marketing and communications.

Details found on any unapproved Fordham-related social media page is ruled out agent of the University.

When applicable, pages registered with Fordham should strive to use all available availability features. This consists of producing and posting any additional material, i.e., alt text, captions and image IDs. The University’s offers more information about adhering to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

Workers utilizing social media on behalf of the University need to follow all suitable requirements including, however not limited to, the Federal Educational Rights and Personal Privacy Act (FERPA) and Health Insurance Coverage Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and NCAA regulations. Workers must not breach intellectual residential or commercial property rights of the University, its faculty and personnel, nor any third celebrations, nor reveal private or private details of the University or third celebrations. A total listing of applicable requirements can be discovered at .

With regard to copyrighted material, this policy uses in combination with, and not independent of, the Regards to Service of any and all social media websites where pertinent material lives. In addition, all copyrighted product needs to respect federal copyright laws.

Professors and Personnel Individual Social Network Accounts/Posts

The University does not seek to figure out the suitability of material on professors and staff’s personal social networks accounts. University personnel who identify themselves as a Fordham faculty or personnel member on their personal social media accounts or in posts or comments need to:

  1. Use their best judgment and exercise personal responsibility individual posting on social media;
  2. Include when appropriate a disclaimer suitable their views, positions, and opinions are their viewpoints and not those of Fordham University; and
  3. With the exception of LinkedIn, no staff member might utilize Fordham’s trademarked or copyrighted marks or symbols without the prior approval of the Workplace of University Communications.

This content was originally published here.

Related posts

Trump’s 2020 attack strategy: Smear Biden over mental fitness By Eric Bradner, Ryan Nobles and Dan Merica, CNN President Donald Trump and his allies have zeroed-in on an attack against Joe Biden, going after the presumptive Democratic governmental nominee’s mental physical fitness in a coordinated effort using smears and innuendo to paint him as ill-quipped to be President of the United States. Trump for months has questioned the mental skill of the opponent he calls “Drowsy Joe.” Trump last week described Biden as “a sleepy person in a basement of a home,” and he has actually repeatedly recommended that Biden did not personally write declarations issued by his project criticizing Trump’s handling of the coronavirus pandemic. His project and the Republican National Committee have progressively focused its attacks on Biden’s tendency for on-camera verbal stumbles in recent weeks, as it looks for to define Biden after he emerged triumphant from the Democratic primary. One example came previously this month, when Trump’s campaign launched an ad comparing Biden and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, which closed with the line: “At least Bernie remembers his positions.” The attacks are an early demonstration of how Trump will utilize the full Republican politician Celebration apparatus to run a scorched-earth campaign based upon personal insults and unwarranted insinuations– a heightened variation of his playbook from 2016, when Trump and his allies, without proof, called into question Hillary Clinton’s health. They have actually become a daily occurrence from Trump’s campaign, assistants and Republican allies throughout every medium possible– on social media, in campaign e-mail blasts and videos and on Trump-aligned media companies like Fox News. Biden’s advisers and Democratic allies mention that Trump is guilty of many of the same verbal tics he is attacking Biden over, and often lies and embraces conspiracy theories. As one Biden ally put it: “Has Trump taken his own guidance and downed a gallon of bleach yet?” The attacks weaponize Biden’s propensity to stumble over words, utilize the wrong word or interrupt himself in the middle of long answers by stating, “anyhow,” and altering course. To fans of a former vice president who in December 2018 called himself a “gaffe maker,” those long-time spoken tics have always belonged to Biden’s public persona. They are made more forgivable to his advocates by Biden’s openness about conquering a stutter. Aside from periodic jousts amongst assistants on Twitter, Biden’s project has mostly neglected the Trump project’s attacks. Biden-world’s view is that the political and media landscape has actually shifted because 2016, when every Trump attack on a rival was treated as novel and took command of the project narrative on social media and cable news. His consultants pointed to Trump’s stopped working efforts to guide the political discussion in the 2017 Virginia governor’s race, when he and his GOP allies cautioned of the MS-13 gang, in addition to the 2018 midterms, when Trump’s message concentrated on caravans of refugees approaching the US-Mexico border. ” The misapprehension that whatever Trump wishes to speak about is inherently efficient and that he gets to act as the media’s at-large task editor has actually been closed,” a Biden consultant said. As Biden has adapted to marketing in the age of coronavirus– knocked off the campaign path and rather transmitting occasions and interviews from a transformed rec room in his basement in Delaware– Trump’s project is seizing on every on-camera miscue, with conservative Trump allies such as Fox News host Sean Hannity then magnifying them. ” His sharpness, or absence thereof is on screen every day, every time he talks,” Trump project spokesperson Tim Murtaugh informed CNN in response to concerns about the technique. “His failure to keep a train of thought going is obvious.” Biden frequently looks down at his notes, which Trump’s allies have actually mischaracterized as Biden dropping off to sleep. Trump’s boy Eric Trump tweeted a seven-second video from Biden’s online broadcast with Hillary Clinton on Tuesday, along with the hashtag “#SleepyJoe.”. Robby Mook, Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign supervisor, said Trump “always projects his biggest weakens on his challenger in an attempt to deflect criticism from himself.”. ” What is very clear is the White Home thinks his presidency will be evaluated on how properly he is managing coronavirus, so it makes ideal sense that he is now attempting to accuse his challenger of incompetence, which is ridiculous.”. The attacks resemble how Trump’s campaign pursued Clinton in 2016, Mook noted. Trump and his campaign frequently cast the former secretary of state as sick or unhealthy, a technique that was further elevated after Clinton stumbled after a September 11 occasion in New York due to concealed pneumonia. ” I simply see a pattern regularly from 2016 all the way through now, which is, he attempts to predict his most significant issues onto his opponents so he gives the media a false equivalence to attempt to muddy the water,” Mook stated. “Part of the factor he was so obsessed with calling Hillary Clinton dishonest is because he is probably the most deceitful individual to win the White Home.”. Biden advisers argue that Trump’s efforts to caricature Biden won’t overcome the same qualities that insulated him in the Democratic primary: After 5 decades in the public eye and eight years as President Barack Obama’s No. 2, voters feel like they know him. Biden frequently expresses distaste for attacks on his rivals’ character. His aides say that by questioning Biden’s mental capability, the President is guiding the project toward concerns of character and fitness. ” This is asinine to tee up– since it’s 10,000 times even worse for him,” a Biden adviser stated. As an example of how easily Trump could be parodied, Biden’s assistants indicated a video from The Daily Show in which Fox News hosts and analysts’ comments about Biden’s mental skill were interspersed with videos of Trump’s own verbal flubs. Biden spokesman Andrew Bates tweeted The Daily Program’s video, which has been seen 3.6 million times on Twitter, on March 25, in action to Trump spokesperson Matt Wolking tweeting: “When is the last time Joe Biden was lucid?”. ” Triggering voters to assess prospects’ mental states is a devastating proposal for Donald Trump, so we’re never going to prevent him from going there,” Bates said. – CNNPolitics.

Authentication failed. No user with this email address found. This content was originally published here.