Wordcraft Home Page    Wordcraft Community Home Page    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  The Written Word    Electronic Media
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Electronic Media Login/Join
 
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted
We are struggling in health care with the inappropriate use of electronic media by health care providers, such as posting about patients or uploading photos taken from cell phones, etc. Therefore, I am currently working with a group where we are setting some very minimal standards, and next year we hope to add a little depth with this.

Here is how we have worded one of our provisions: "Posting or transmitting images, audio or video recordings, or messages via electronic media that can be reasonably interpreted as sexually demeaning to the current or former patient or key party." [Keep in mind the lawyers are working with us on this, and this particular piece is only about sexual misconduct, though we also plan to write one about boundary crossings.] We went back and forth with that term "electronic media," trying to identify a term that was broad and included most of what is currently used and most likely will be used in the future. For example, we didn't want to use "Facebook" as that medium will change in the future. Even "social networking" seemed a little too specific.

My question: Does electronic media work for this? If so, how might we define it?

Thanks so much!
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
It works for me! I take it something other than faces are being posted on facebook?


It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society. -J. Krishnamurti
 
Posts: 6168 | Location: Muncie, IndianaReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Oh, my, yes. It is a disaster.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Richard English
posted Hide Post
Electronic media as opposed to written media, spoken media, broadcast media et al. Seems fine to me.


Richard English
 
Posts: 8038 | Location: Partridge Green, West Sussex, UKReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Now our editors want to use "social media." I thought it seemed too specific, but she found some articles that define it more broadly. Thoughts?
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
<Proofreader>
posted
Social media, IMO, is Facebook and Twitter et al, which should be covered by electronic media.
 
Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of arnie
posted Hide Post
I don't see the point of restricting it to "social media". What if someone decides to publish via an ordinary static Web site? Surely you want that possibility covered, and "electronic media" will take care of that.

EDIT: It's also occurred to me that the use of "electronic media" would also cover instances when someone sends another pictures of patients using a mobile (cell) phone. ISTR you mentioned this problem in the past, Kalleh.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: arnie,


Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 
Posts: 10940 | Location: LondonReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
quote:
Social media, IMO, is Facebook and Twitter et al, which should be covered by electronic media.
I would agree with this, and that's why I wanted electronic media. However, our editors found a definition of "social media" online that incorporates everything from forums and discussion boards to wikis. We did talk about the camera photos, and she thought social media would include that, too, because you'd be uploading them on sites which would be considered social media.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of arnie
posted Hide Post
quote:
because you'd be uploading them on sites which would be considered social media.

Sites like Facebook or Flickr, yes. However, there are plenty of other ways to upload photos to the Web that don't involve sites with social features. To repeat myself, what on earth is the point of restricting it to "social media"? Surely you don't want them taking any such photos at all, even if they are just shared with close friends?


Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 
Posts: 10940 | Location: LondonReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
I agree with you, arnie. But I am losing this argument. All because of some definition she found online. It's ironic when you think about it.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of wordmatic
posted Hide Post
Maybe the lawyers will veto her narrow-mindedness! I agree that electronic media covers every possibility--of course, you also don't want them even printing such pictures and passing them around, which would not be electronic. I would probably say "via any medium, electronic or print" to cover every base. What's the matter with these people? Didn't they read those interminable HIPPA statements they are always asking us to sign?

It boggles the mind!

Wordmatic
 
Posts: 1390 | Location: Near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Oh, that's a good point, WM.

You all have talked me into using "electronic media" in the documents I control. If others want to use "social media," so be it.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Well, here is the definition I came up with:

Online forms of publication, including Web sites, blogs and social networking sites.

Does that work?
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of wordmatic
posted Hide Post
Yes!

WM
 
Posts: 1390 | Location: Near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Now I am wondering if it should be "communication" instead of "publication."
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of BobHale
posted Hide Post
No it shouldn't. Publication is an intention to communicate. If you use "communication" instead you run the risk of encountering the defence "well yes I put it on the internet but nobody actually looked at it, so that's OK".

I think you can overthink these things if you aren't careful.


"No man but a blockhead ever wrote except for money." Samuel Johnson.
 
Posts: 9421 | Location: EnglandReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Ah, makes sense. Does "publication" include audio and video, as well as writing? I think so, but that was why I changed it to communication.

My meeting is tomorrow at 10 a.m. so I am looking for as many comments before that time as possible.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of arnie
posted Hide Post
quote:
... including Web sites, blogs and social networking sites.

Why are you still restricting it? At least, say something like "including, but not restricted to, Web sites ....".


Build a man a fire and he's warm for a day. Set a man on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 
Posts: 10940 | Location: LondonReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Good point, arnie. And the Boards and their lawyers just love the phrase "including but not limited to."
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
Picture of Kalleh
posted Hide Post
Well, folks, I got it through with your help. Thank you!

Now it has to be approved by our Board and then voted on by our membership in August.
 
Posts: 24735 | Location: Chicago, USAReply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

Wordcraft Home Page    Wordcraft Community Home Page    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  The Written Word    Electronic Media

Copyright © 2002-12