Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Brokers Get Strict Social Networking Rules

Posted by samzenpus on from the no-farmville-at-work dept.

eldavojohn writes "If you're a broker or work for a brokerage firm then you better think twice before posting content to Facebook and Twitter. It seems the static parts of the pages like your profile must be approved and fall under the watch of FINRA. But a post to Facebook or a tweet might constitute a 'public appearance' representing your firm. Which means that 'firms must supervise these interactive electronic communications under NASD Rule 3010 in a manner reasonably designed to ensure that they do not violate the content requirements of FINRA's communications rules.' It's days like these I'm glad I don't work on Wall Street or have jury duty."

12 of 50 comments (clear)

  1. Read the article by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you're a registered broker or work for firm that sells any sort of investment products, you'll want to think twice before blurting out anything that could be construed as investment advice on Facebook, Twitter, or any other social networking site.

    1. Re:Read the article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And it can be added that if you're a stock researcher who happened to be quoted on the news, every man and his dog will ask you "What is a great company to invest in??" and "I bought shares in Lagerfeldt & Grunnmeier Warehouse Consortium 30 years ago and they seem to be worth nothing, should I sell them or what should I do?" Giving any answer at all puts you in the firing line.

      Ironically, while this makes life a bitch, it also boosts earnings - because the compliance hoops function as a barrier to entry.

    2. Re:Read the article by Phroggy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Basically, if your e-mail is already subject to draconian regulations and every e-mail message you've ever sent or received has been archived by a third party and someone in your company's (or your broker-dealer's) compliance department regularly reads your e-mail to make sure you haven't said anything you're not supposed to and every once in awhile FINRA auditors come by to make sure the compliance department is really reviewing your e-mail like they say they are, and now your company wants to start using Twitter for business communications, you can expect the same level of scrutiny of your tweets that you've come to enjoy with your e-mail.

      If none of the above applies to you, then you have absolutely nothing to worry about.

      Also, since all that e-mail compliance stuff only applies to business e-mail and not personal e-mail, the same should be true of Twitter. Keep your personal Twitter account separate from your business Twitter account, just like you do with your personal and business e-mail accounts, and everything is fine.

      --
      $x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
      $x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
  2. Moronic commentary by Malc · · Score: 5, Insightful

    " It's days like these I'm glad I don't work on Wall Street or have jury duty."

    And if you worked for the CIA, would you be complaining that you can't tweet about classified information? If you've chosen to work on Wall Street, the chances are that you accepted that there are some things you can't talk about long before Facebook and Twitter came along (or if you've just started, you know it's part of the territory). So what?

    1. Re:Moronic commentary by MrMista_B · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Then whoever's complaining doesn't know what they're talking about. From The Fine Article:

      'If you're a registered broker or work for firm that sells any sort of investment products, you'll want to think twice before blurting out anything that could be construed as investment advice on Facebook, Twitter, or any other social networking site.'

      It's a non-story.

    2. Re:Moronic commentary by victorhooi · · Score: 3, Interesting

      heya,

      Yeah, I'd have to agree, this is a non-story.

      I also work for an IB, although not in a client-facing area. Still, I'm not enough of a prat to intentionally start posting privileged info or restricted info on a public forum, or even a private form for that matter.

      When we first interned, they told us there were restrictions on the sort of trading we could do on our own (e.g. have to disclose to the bank, must hold for 30 days etc.). A lot of people whined at the time, but look, seriously, you're working full-time for a IB, it's not like you really need to do day-trading on the side to put bread on the table.

      For fun, sure, but how the heck do you find time during the day to do any serious trading, on your own account? And you're risking a lot, who's not to say that something you overhear at work won't influence your personal trading decisions, whether subconsciously or not. Or maybe a post-it note you saw on somebody else's desk? A little trading for fun, maybe, but I certainly wouldn't put the house on it, or start leveraging for it. So if I lose, meh, it's just pocket change.

      It's the same reason I don't use FB, or put drunken photos of myself on Twitpics (well, fine I don't drink but meh, you get the idea). Civil rights or not, I don't want a Google search for my name by a HR hack to turn up something bad.

      Cheers,
      Victor

    3. Re:Moronic commentary by AarghVark · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah, but unlike the folks at the CIA they get hefty bonuses. Makes me cry to think that they have to deal with some of the same types of rules that police, teachers, and doctors already have to deal with regarding their actions outside of the office. If they don't like the responsibilities of the job they are always free to quit. These jobs typically pay a lot more than other jobs which fall under similar levels of scrutiny.

  3. Re:What's next? by ArsenneLupin · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yes. There will be TV cameras in all offices.

    ... except in the oval office.

  4. Funny by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's days like these I'm glad I don't work on Wall Street or have jury duty."

    Funny, I was thinking that it's days like his when I'm glad I have no urge to use Facebook :)

  5. "It's just a dumb regulation." by John+Hasler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You wanted more "oversight". You're getting it.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  6. Re:Exactly backwards by pnuema · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Speaking as a former brokerage employee...

    Didn't read the article, but the industry has very specific rules about what you can tell a client. Basically, you can never guarantee something will make money. Firms have to be able to produce 7 years of correspondence from a broker on demand. This meant that as an employee of a firm, while at work I was not able to use any communication channel not controlled by the firm (due to archive reasons). This meant no web mail, twitter, Facebook, anything. From what I see, FINRA is just pointing out that even though technology has changed, these rules have not.

  7. Old news... by chill · · Score: 2, Informative

    Working as an IT Director for a broker/dealer firm a couple years ago, this was policy.

    ALL telephone calls into and out of the office were recorded and archived for 10 years. All e-mail was archived for 7. IM was forbidden. ANY web presence, from web site to Facebook must be approved in advance from the compliance department (lawyers). There are web hosting companies that specialize in this, with SEC/FINRA pre-approved content and approval accounts for compliance.

    We had finally moved to the state that any new independent financial adviser that joined MUST use a web site with our approved hosting service and may NOT use their own.

    Violation were punishable by company imposed fines and the possibility of losing your license, and they were STRICT.

    --
    Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.