I don’t really think people over the age of 27 understand why people use facebook. At this point, for people under the age of 25 it’s almost a social necessity- like having a cell phone or an email account. I’ll explain it like this- if all my friends have facebook, and they communicate through facebook. If i don’t have facebook, i essentially get left out of the loop.

Why is age 27 the magical number? because facebook popularity started around 2004-2005. If you graduated college before then(2003) you could have set your entire social network without facebook. Currently for a college student, it’s almost social suicide not to use facebook.

It’s my belief that people under the age of 27 will be hurt socially(and possibly economically) in the future if they don’t use facebook. Trending forward, the percentage of facebook users in the medical profession will go up. People who don’t use facebook in the future will only isolate themselves from the emergent facebook using medical community.

As for “inappropriate content”. Here’s the JAMA article results.

Violations of patient confidentiality were reported by 13% (6/46). Student use of profanity (52%; 22/42), frankly discriminatory language (48%; 19/40), depiction of intoxication (39%; 17/44), and sexually suggestive material (38%; 16/42) were commonly reported.

I would argue only violations of patient confidentiality constitutes “inappropriate content.”

People who criticize facebook posters for “sexually suggestive material, profanity and depictions of intoxication” simply don’t understand that’s the norm in facebook. I don’t have that stuff on my facebook because i’m a bit of a nerd. But when i see my friends post stuff like that…. it’s almost like white noise to me- I don’t even blink. 20 years from now…. when the facebook using med students of today become the doctors of tomorrow I truely believe this problem will become a non issue. Like how many hippies of the 60s became the leaders of today.

As for “descriminatory content”… i’m sorta on the fence about that. I don’t know what administrators define as frankly descriminatory language. Personally, i wouldn’t constitute anything posted from my friends as frankly descriminatory. So i’m sort of confused by that issue.

I do think that there needs to be some education on social networking sites, especially concerning patient confidentiality. But the issue isn’t as problematic as the posted video makes it out to be

I agree that no one should be doing really crazy things and posting that. But I know people who have been officially reprimanded for something as basic as posting profanity or complaining about a difficult person they interacted with (in a non-specific, non-confidentiality breaking manner).

As for the final comment aobut the salary: pure and utter rubbish.

One such revelation being bragged about was the hazing of a new student in the O.R. doing his first pelvic on an unconscious obese patient. The “antics” that followed was so disgusting that I will never chose a teaching hospital if I can help it.

That’s what you’re doing when you “just live” all over some blog or website.

Yikes. You docs are really naive about the internet aren’t you? Please don’t get EMR when you’re in practise. Stick with a pencil.

I completely agree with the need to protect patient confidentiality. However, aside from that, I do find it saddening that we are either compelled by extrinsic forces (threat of reprimand or worse) or intrinsic reasons (fear of reprimand or worse) to sanitize our online interactions. I often feel that I just cannot “live” they way some of my friends who are in other fields can.

It would seem sensible for institutions to warn students of the risks associated with web 2.0 and social networking. The ethics curriculum would be an ideal place for this. I also believe that ethics teaching should begin in the first year of medical training and continue at regular intervals until graduation.