Kennesaw State University
DigitalCommons@Kennesaw State University
"23&1/'4#,*$%-*.*231"3*/.1"$3*$4-2
&0"13-&.3/'/,*3*$",$*&.$&".%.3&1."3*/.",
9"*12
E&ective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement
Agencies: A Case Study Approach to Quantifying
and Improving E'cacy and Developing Agency
Best Practices
David T. Snively
Kennesaw State University%32.*5&,7(-"*,$/-
/,,/63)*2".%"%%*3*/.",6/1+2"3 )<0%*(*3",$/--/.2+&..&2"6&%4-0"!&3%
"13/'3)& %-*.*231"3*5&"6/--/.2 1*-*.","6/--/.2 1*-*./,/(7".%1*-*.",
423*$&/--/.2 "6".%/$*&37/--/.2 &(",;&/17/--/.2 3)&14#,*$9"*12
4#,*$/,*$7".%4#,*$%-*.*231"3*/./--/.2 /,*$7&2*(..",72*2".%5",4"3*/.
/--/.2 4#,*$%-*.*231"3*/./--/.2".%3)& 4#,*$/,*$7/--/.2
;*21"$3*$4-*2#1/4()33/7/4'/1'1&&".%/0&."$$&22#73)&&0"13-&.3/'/,*3*$",$*&.$&".%.3&1."3*/.",9"*12"3
*(*3",/--/.2&..&2"63"3& .*5&12*373)"2#&&."$$&03&%'/1*.$,42*/.*."23&1/'4#,*$%-*.*231"3*/.1"$3*$4-2#7"."43)/1*8&%
"%-*.*231"3/1/'*(*3",/--/.2&..&2"63"3& .*5&12*37/1-/1&*.'/1-"3*/.0,&"2&$/.3"$3 %*(*3",$/--/.2+&..&2"6&%4
&$/--&.%&%*3"3*/.
.*5&,7"5*%9&$3*5&/$*",&%*" 2"6.'/1$&-&.3(&.$*&2"2&34%7001/"$)3/4".3*'7*.(".%-01/5*.(
:$"$7".%&5&,/0*.((&.$7&231"$3*$&2 Master of Public Administration Practicums
)<0%*(*3",$/--/.2+&..&2"6&%4-0"!&3%
Running Head: Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 1
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement Agencies:
A Case Study Approach to Quantifying and Improving Efficacy and
Developing Agency Best Practices
David T. Snively
A Writing Sample
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for Admission to the
Doctor of Philosophy in Criminal Justice and Criminology
Georgia State University
Andrew Young School of Policy Studies
January, 2017
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 2
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ………………………………………………………………………………3
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..5
Case Study: Ferguson, Missouri Officer Involved Shooting……………………………...5
Case Study: Bangor, Maine Facebook Page………………………………………………9
Police – Community Relations: Past and Present ……………………………………………….10
Social Media Recommendations
Policies and General Guidance…………………………………………………………..12
Specific Social Media Strategies………………………………………………………...14
Measuring Efficacy
Quantifiable Efficacy…………………………………………………………………….15
Perceived Efficacy……………………………………………………………………….17
Legitimacy, Public Trust, and Legal / Ethical Considerations
Legitimacy……………………………………………………………………………….18
Public Trust………………………………………………………………………………21
Legal and Ethical Considerations……..………………………………………................23
Protecting Employee Identities and Ensuring Safety……………………………………………25
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………….26
References………………………………………………………………………………………..28
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 3
Executive Summary
Problem Identification
In the wake of protests against law enforcement for an array of reasons, law enforcement
officers and agencies have a responsibility to recognize and utilize the available mediums of
communication with which they may best develop a connection to the communities they serve.
Furthermore, law enforcement agencies must be informed that established, traditional methods of
news dissemination – such as press conferences and printed articles – are now both ineffective
and under-utilized, replaced in large part by social media live-time reports. For that reason, law
enforcement agency executives must address both the responsibility to provide appropriately
timed updates to critical incidents and events, and utilize the opportunity to engage their
community through a widely utilized and accepted medium of communication. Both require an
understanding of social media, its application, and its efficacy both literal and perceived.
Research Purpose
This paper explores the connection between social media postings in an array of formats
and their correlation with perception of law enforcement agencies, specifically agency
accessibility and efficacy, and represents an effort to guide the creation of exemplary policies
and procedures for utilizing social media rooted in measurable best practices. It further
considers the recommendations of industry experts, practitioners, and researchers.
Research Methods
The research relies on case studies of exceptional occurrences involving police use – or
their lack of use – of social media, and case studies of established policies and law related to or
governing law enforcement use of social media. It further relies on review of surveys, most of
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 4
which were conducted by the International Association of Chiefs of Police Center for Social
Media.
Research Conclusion
By creating intentional mechanisms for implementation and upkeep of social media sites,
with deliberate attention to message content and delivery strategies, safety, and response to
feedback, the research concludes that law enforcement agencies may simultaneously increase
community contacts, connection, and involvement while positively affecting perceptions of their
agency specifically and law enforcement generally. To that end, this research identifies
deliberate, implementable social media strategies and practices including those designed to
improve law enforcement-community relations and those aimed at crime solving and threat
monitoring and analysis.
Keywords: social media, police, sheriff, law enforcement, policy, law.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 5
INTRODUCTION
In the wake of social movements across the world, sparked and largely facilitated by the
use of social media, from “flash-mobs,” to protests, to overt efforts to overthrow entire
governments, law enforcement agencies have an obvious responsibility to create and maintain a
social media presence. Considering the present environment and condition of policing in the
United States, this responsibility extends beyond observing and searching for illicit or subversive
postings – although that necessity remains – and also includes active engagement with consumers
at the municipal, county, state, and federal levels. Certainly, examples of failure to engage and
explain policing dynamics to the communities they serve can be found in law enforcement
agencies across the country. Perhaps none are more illustrative than the near collapse of law in
Ferguson, Missouri in 2014; and again in Baltimore, Maryland in 2015. The former is discussed
in greater detail below. Contrarily, police departments of all sizes and from coast to coast have
enjoyed tremendous positive press, stemming largely from well-designed social media postings
illustrating their everyday endeavors to better the communities they serve. For example, Bangor,
Maine, population 33,000, boasts more than 183,000 Facebook followers on their tremendously
engaging page. Examples like these highlight the urgent need to understand the effects of social
media postings and their representation of law enforcement agencies, and to employ social media
appropriately in the daily operations of law enforcement agencies at all levels.
“Game Changing:” The Ferguson Failure
On August 09, 2016, Officer Darren Wilson was on duty as a patrolman with the
Ferguson, Missouri Police Department. At about 12:00 noon, Officer Wilson responded to a
report of a “stealing in progress” and began to search the area for the suspects (Patrick, 2014).
According to Patrick (2014), Wilson notified his dispatcher that he was out with two suspects at
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 6
12:02pm; one of those two men was eighteen-year-old Michael Brown. Less than ninety
seconds after Wilson stopped his patrol car, Michael Brown was dead – shot at least six times by
Wilson (Eckholm, 2014). This paper takes no position on the incidents surrounding Brown’s
death, nor does it seek either to justify or condemn Officer Wilson’s conduct; those specific
issues are not relevant to the thesis. However, those events do lay the foundation for the most
dramatic shift in police-community interaction in modern police history.
Prior to Michael Brown’s death, police agencies and traditional media generally adhered
to an established protocol. Specifically, reporters could generally expect a brief statement from
police several hours after the initial incident, with periodic updates well into the investigation
and as details of systematic interviews became known first to police, then to the press (Grogan,
2016). Although that model had already begun a dramatic paradigm change, with traditional
media being largely steered by near-instant social media posts, no single incident was more
illustrative of that shift than was Ferguson. Almost immediately, Ferguson Police passed off the
investigation into Brown’s shooting to the Saint Louis County Police Department, a common
practice by smaller police agencies (Patrick, 2014). The first public comment by Saint Louis
County Police came twenty-three hours after the shooting in the form of a post on the
department’s Facebook page (Grogan, 2016). The six paragraph, 1,438-character post – more
than ten times the character limit of Twitter – identified Saint Louis County Police as the lead
investigating agency, cited the authority of their police chief, described the agency’s partnership
with the Saint Louis County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office, and urged calm. (Baumer, 2014).
Perhaps most importantly, the final line of the post read, “Please keep watching this page for
more information to come on this incident” (Baumer, 2014). The next updated by Saint Louis
County Police did not come for fifteen days (Grogan, 2016).
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 7
In stark contrast, more than 146,000 tweets were sent in the first twenty-four hours
following Brown’s death (Zak, 2014). Four days later, that number surged to 3.6 million tweets
sent during President Barak Obama’s televised remarks on the incident; by comparison, fewer
than 400,000 were sent during President Obama’s 2012 remarks on the death of Trayvon Martin
under similar circumstances (Miners, 2014). One week after Brown’s death, nearly eight million
tweets referencing the incident had been recorded and, when Prosecuting Attorney Bob
McCulloch announced the grand jury’s decision not to incident Officer Wilson, tweets were
being sent at a rate of 52,000 per minute – 867 per second (Miners, 2014). Notably, while the
social media firestorm surrounding Ferguson was unmatched at the time, it is largely
unremarkable now, when compared to the evolution of similar social media posts on newsworthy
matters. What was unique, however, was the tremendous amount of misinformation
promulgated in those early days, most of it unaddressed by Ferguson or Saint Louis County
Police. Within hours of the shooting, a catchphrase and Twitter hashtag had emerged:
#HandsUpDontShoot (Capehart, 2015). The phrase accompanied allegations that Officer Wilson
shot Brown in the back as he surrendered – an assertion spread in social, print, television, and
radio reports. Importantly that avowal was completely debunked by multiple witness statements,
by the forensic evidence at the scene, and by the autopsy report of three separate, unrelated
medical examiners preforming independent autopsies. However, absent any information to the
contrary – or any information at all – by the police, news outlets relied on the incorrect
statements of anyone willing to appear on camera (Capehart, 2015). The Ferguson Police
Department’s failure to control the message by timely dissemination of accurate information, or
to correct the misinformation being widely distributed, laid the foundation for months of violent
protests that rocked the city and brought area law enforcement to near total collapse.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 8
Within a week of Brown’s shooting, the city of Ferguson had devolved into widespread
protests, riots, and looting. Police officers from agencies across the state were mobilized and,
eventually, were supported by the National Guard in an attempt to restore order. On August 15,
2016 a report and video were published by Ferguson Police, showing Michael Brown robbing a
convenience store and assaulting the store clerk in the final moments of his life. Police cited
compliance with Missouri’s Sunshine Law – the state equivalent of the federal Freedom of
Information Act – as the reason for release, but many criticized the police as merely attempting
to disgrace Brown in his death (Berman and Lowery, 2014). Irrespective of its purpose or effect,
critics rightly condemned the haphazard release of information by all of the investigative
agencies – and especially Ferguson Police – as “erratic and infrequent” ("Ferguson Police Chief
Thomas Jackson Cedes Much of His Authority," 2014). This was largely caused by the
Ferguson Police Department's failure to establish and follow a social media policy and protocol
in advance of such a critical incident.
From the dramatic examples of Ferguson, two main points may be identified. First, law
enforcement agencies must recognize that the media environment in which they are operating is
dramatically changed, and requires intentional and direct interaction. Second, law enforcement
agencies that fail to appropriately control the flow of information about and directed at their
agency, risk a tremendous cost. In Ferguson, those institutional failures cost a police chief his
job; hundreds of thousands of dollars in property damage; injuries to police officer and
protestors; and a loss of trust between police officers and the community they serve that may
never be fully repaired.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 9
More Followers than Citizens: The Success of the Bangor, Maine Facebook Page.
Bangor, Maine is located about seventy miles northeast of the state capitol of Augusta.
The almost thirty-five square mile city is home to 33,039, residents according to the 2010 census,
and boasts a full-time police department of eighty-two officers. Despite its relatively small size,
the police department’s Facebook page has more than 180,000 followers – more than double that
of the Maine State Police, and more than five times its own population. Supported by a handful
of other officers in the department, Sergeant Tim Cotton is responsible for every post on the
page. He concludes each of them with the same phrase: “Keep your hands to yourself, leave
other people’s things alone, and be kind to one another. The men and women of the Bangor
Police Department will be here.” Bangor’s Facebook boasts followers from around the world,
and Cotton has been discussed by publications including the Washington Post, New York Post,
and Boston Globe.
Bangor’s social media strategy, using a largely sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek and stream of
consciousness writing style, is largely contradictory to the recommendations of social media
consultants (Dubino, 2015). However, Cotton clearly knows his audience, and – perhaps the
most important factor in any social media posting – his message is well received (Pohle, 2016).
Grogan (2015a) found that humor drives social media engagement more than any other writing
style, but cautions that it must be cautiously implemented. Grogan (2015a) also recommended
incremental trial and observation of varying strategies. Importantly, Bangor employs several
strategies – many discussed at length in this paper – to appeal to their followers, and promote a
cohesive message. Dubino highlights the positive takeaways: keep posts compelling to invite
and improve readership, create and repeat a convincing message, and find an angle and stick
with it (2015). The Department’s careful implementation of their social media plan resulted in a
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 10
dramatic increase in community tips – and, related, an increase in case closure rates – and,
according to Cotton, improved police – citizen interactions (Netter, 2015).
Police – Community Relations: Past and Present
Wentz and Schlingmen’s (2012) discussion of perceptions of policing highlight the
ubiquitous – but oft ignored – fact that recent developments in society have tended to lead police
to a reactive, rather than proactive stance (Bain, Robinson, & Conser, 2014). The immediate
criticisms of this response-driven approach to policing ignores the positive impact that a uniformed
officer’s presence – irrespective of his purpose – can have on public perception (Bain, Robinson,
& Conser, 2014). Still, a failure to engage the community appropriately or adequately leads
residents to conclude that they will only ever have contact with the police in one of two ways: (1)
following their involvement with crime, either as an offender, victim, or witness; or/and (2)
through their consumption of media reporting (Bain, Robinson, & Conser, 2014). Importantly,
Schulenburg and Cheiner (2013) found that media de-contextualization of people and events,
coupled with episodic coverage, creates intentional conflict to influence public perception and
increase viewership. Thus, the result of isolated, often single, encounters with law enforcement
will frequently provide the only basis of knowledge from which a citizen may judge police
efficacy, professionalism, compassion, or any number of means of evaluation (Bain, Robinson, &
Conser, 2014). But the ability of the police to function as an efficient service is often predicated
on the positive image they maintain with the general public (Wentz & Schlimgen, 2012).
Therefore, the need to engage communities and their individual members in formats other than
reactionary or enforcement encounters, is clear.
How best to address this interaction has long been a topic of discussion among law
enforcement executives and public information officers. This is further complicated by the
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 11
evolution of social media and the decrease in physical engagement by younger generations. Keane
and Bell (2013) noted that the immediate reaction of the police to any single, high-profile act of
violence is to increase their physical presence in the local communities. However, they contend
that providing information, guidance, and public support would be a far more appropriate course
of action. Wentz and Schlimgen (2012) went further, writing, “indirect experience may be of
greater importance than actual contact.” They continue, “when assessing public perceptions of the
police response to community concerns, ‘indirect experiences can be defined as any contact which
does not require a face-to-face dialogue, such as posters, flyers, and internet resources” (Wentz
and Schlimgen, 2012). Meijer and Thanes (2013) also found that it is of tremendous importance
that law enforcement agencies engage different groups and note that actual engagement can vary
with different groups. “Although local meetings and community groups may go some way in
filling this need, these are not popular with younger generations, who engage in far more activity
with instant and automated systems/services” (Bain, Robinson, & Conser, 2014). In fact, as of
October, 2016, there are nearly eight billion mobile connections belonging to 4.8 billion unique
subscribers (Boren, 2016). And, while the world’s population of 7.2 billion is growing at a rate of
about two people per second, the number of devices is increasing by more than ten per second
(Boren, 2016). Phrased more simply, there are more phones than people in the world, and that
trend is increasing at tremendous speed. Grogan (2015a) notes that agencies must be aware that
the overwhelming majority of their citizens are utilizing mobile devices to connect to services of
all types. Accordingly, law enforcement agencies are given an opportunity to create a method of
engagement that may be sought out or/and widely distributed.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 12
SOCIAL MEDIA RECOMMENDATIONS
Policies and General Guidance
Recognizing the growing reliance on social media, and the need for comprehensive
guidance to law enforcement agencies across the globe, the United States headquartered
International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) launched a stand-alone website, the IACP
Center for Social Media, to offer direction to law enforcement agencies implementing social media
projects. The site includes more than thirty subdivisions by individual social media platform,
including Facebook, Twitter, Nixle, Instagram, and nearly three dozen more. The Association’s
mission states that the IACP “endorses the secure use of social media to enhance communication,
collaboration, and information exchange; streamline processes; and foster productivity” (IACP
Policy, n.d.). IACP further acknowledges, “social media provides a new and potentially valuable
means of assisting [law enforcement agencies] and its personnel in meeting community outreach,
problem-solving, investigative, crime prevention, and related objectives” (IACP Policy, n.d.). In
fact, key findings from the Association’s 2015 survey of law enforcement use of social media
concluded that: 96.4% of agencies surveyed use social media and 73.9% of agencies not currently
using social media are considering its adoption (IACP Survey, 2014). The study further found:
83.5% of law enforcement agencies using social media reported that the use has improved
relationships between their agency and the public (IACP Survey, 2014). Furthermore, the survey
showed 88.7% of agencies use social media for criminal investigations and 85.5% of agencies
report that social media has helped solve crimes in their jurisdiction. Significantly, more than 25%
of law enforcement officers report using social media for investigations daily – up from 16% in
2012 (IACP Survey, 2014; LexisNexis Survey, 2015). In addition to supporting the foregoing
conclusions, the IACP survey – in particular, the strong use of social media for criminal
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 13
investigations – adds an additional complexity and demonstrates a clear need for agency
consideration.
Simply having a static presence on social media – that is: creating a Facebook, Twitter,
Instagram, or other similar page – is likely insufficient to develop, foster, or maintain community
relationships. In much the same way that traditional relationships must be refreshed and
maintained, so too should social media pages. Remembering Grogan’s (2015a) remarks on the
number of mobile devices, law enforcement social media contributors should consider that most
of their posts will be viewed by citizens using smart phones, not traditional computers. This
knowledge may allow content creators to prepare posts with an appropriate length, format, type,
and style. The content and images should be recent and relevant, and so intrigue or engage visitors
that they both return themselves and recommend the site to others. This may be difficult within
the confines of existing hierarchical settings, both internally – from the paramilitary structure of
most law enforcement agencies – and externally, given the highly regulated and broadcasting
culture of government organizations in general (Mergel, 2012). The result is a need for a social
media strategy in the form of a series of strategic choices regarding coupling social media with
organizational tasks, developing a range of objectives, and delegation of responsibility for social
media management (Picazo-Vela, Gutierrez-Martines, & Luna-Reyes, 2012). More succinctly,
the use of social media involves a series of practical decisions, including: what medium is to be
used, what kind of information is to be provided through that medium, who is going to provide the
information, and what the organization will do with reactions (Meijer & Thaens, 2013). To that
end, Meijer and Thanes (2013) propose the existence of four categories of strategies: push, pull,
networking, and transaction.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 14
Specific Social Media Strategies
In a push strategy, social media are predominately used to broadcast existing web content
or prepared statements from law enforcement agencies to the public; there is no interaction (Meijer
& Thanes, 2013; Mergel, 2012). This is not an inherently inappropriate or inefficient strategy. In
fact, during their response to the Boston Marathon bombing in 2013, Boston Police advertised
their Twitter account as the official – and only – place for real-time updates. Their followers
increased by 400,000 in twenty-four hours as they published alerts, corrected news accounts, and
issued orders to shelter or evacuate. Conversely, a pull strategy is an organizational attempt to
attract users to the website and have them provide new information (Meijer & Thanes, 2013). This
strategy is most evident on the “Next Door” platform, a cyber neighborhood watch style blog that
allows information sharing between residents of a specific neighborhood with little administrative
engagement by police officials. The networking strategy, proposed by Mergel (2012), recognizes
that “the use of social media tools is highly interactive with a lot of back and forward between the
agency and its diverse constituencies. This strategy allows government agencies to participate
actively in actual networking and interactive engagement, presenting information and gathering
and reacting to feedback, and is especially present in agencies that allow multiple contributors to
post and respond to post reactions (Meijer & Thanes, 2013). Finally, a transaction strategy is one
in which government services are conducted through social media applications (Meijer & Thanes,
2013). In his 2012 article, Mergel noted that the transaction strategy was rarely used. However,
the use of this strategy is increasingly observable, as with expanding accessibility to text and
internet enabled 911 centers and responsive services facilitated by social media sites. Meijer &
Thanes’ (2013) research concluded that the most effective law enforcement agency social media
strategies involved some form of each of these methods. Specifically, agencies implementing new
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 15
programs often began with a strictly push method, but evolved to include pull and networking
methods. Employed collectively, push, pull, and networking strategies saw the greatest
advancement of agency goals, community interaction, trust, and positive perception (Meijer &
Thanes, 2013; Mergle, 2012).
MEASURING EFFICACY
Quantifiable Efficacy
Van de Velde, Meijer, and Homburg (2015) measured the diffusion of messages sent by
police officers and agencies on Twitter. Specifically, those researchers sought to explicitly
differentiate between message and user characterizes, essentially seeking to identify specific
actionable methods by which police may reach broader audiences, irrespective of differences
between individual authors. They did so by coding and analyzing messages sent from 964 Dutch
Police Twitter accounts, including: street-level police officers, community policing
representatives, district or division managers, and public information officers, and measuring the
number of views and re-tweets of each post (Van de Velde, Meijer, & Homburg (2015). Among
their notable findings: the effect of authorship style diminishes as an account gets more followers
(Van de Velde, Meijer, & Homburg (2015). While, on its face, this might be reassuring to law
enforcement agencies seeking to implement a social media strategy, it is important to note that
authorship style is highly correlated with followership and message diffusion early in the existence
of the account, or until it achieves a large number of followers – an amount not defined by the
authors (Van de Velde, Meijer, & Homburg (2015). For that reason, attention to the detail and
style of each post, and particularly how posts are received by the target audience, remain very
important (Grogan, 2015a). Van de Velde, Meijer, and Homburg (2015) also found that including
URLs, hashtags demonstrative of larger trends or broader conversations, and mentioning other
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 16
users or accounts had strong, positive correlations with increased message diffusion. As important
as the literal content of each message studied, Van de Velde, Meijer, and Homburg’s 2015 study
also concluded that significant effects are observable for specific topics. For example, posts related
to missing persons were the most likely topic to be re-tweeted, followed by posts regarding wanted
persons or/and seeking witnesses.
These facts align with traditional, arguably less scientific, measures of efficacy available
through most social media platforms. For example, Facebook Insights and Twitter Analytics both
allow page managers to track their pages generally, and individual posts specifically. By utilizing
Facebook Insights, police social media managers can quickly observe page activity including,
views, clicks, and reactions. Because Facebook now allows six reactions: like, love, wow, haha,
sad, and angry, reactions are listed in sum and with a breakdown of each. Insights further allows
contributors to see their average response time to messages, see peak posts, and compare postings
to other, similar Facebook pages. Notably, the tool also displays a demographic breakdown
including sex, country, city, and language. Similarly, Twitter Analytics provides tools to measure
engagement, determine followers’ other interests, their location and demographics, and offers
suggestions on increasing the reach of individual tweets.
Although the literal efficacy of posts, including post reach and amount of actual
engagement, is one measure of social media success, police agencies are likely more interested in
increasing and improving community contacts or, minimally, the perception there of. For that
reason, it is as important – or more – for law enforcement agencies utilizing social media to be
familiar with the perceptions of their agency and the law enforcement profession created thereby.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 17
Perceived Efficacy
Importantly, Grimmelikhuijsen and Meijer’s (2015) found that “a direct channel with
citizens…to communicate successes does help the police strengthen their legitimacy, but only
slightly and for a small group of interested citizens. This contention is countered, however, by
Gray (2015) who points out that those researchers failed to consider the broader impact of those
few people who do engage media with the police on social media. As with varied levels of social
standing and prominence in the traditional sense, social media contributors have audiences and
followers of their own. Thus, even repeat engagement from only a handful of participants is likely
to be more widely disseminated as those postings are viewed and “shared.” Considered in the
context of traditional policing, how an officer manages or responds to someone on the street –
particularly a person in crisis – can have the same effect. Onlookers are likely unable to
sympathize with the person needing police assistance, but they can surely empathize with the way
that person is treated by the responding officer (Gray, 2015). After witnessing the police-citizen
interaction, a citizen – who may have previously held a positive, negative, or neutral view of the
police – then possesses a specific example by which their perception may be confirmed, refined,
or changed. Similarly, citizens who never intended to engage the police via social media, but who
have occasion to view a posting by a police agency or an agency’s response to a posting by an
external entity, are given a lens through which to view that agency and form an opinion. This
parallel highlights the need for careful consideration in social media postings and responses, and
an acknowledgment that remarks published online, even intended for a specific group, are likely
to transcend the intended borders and become public for view and discussion (Reynolds, 2014).
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 18
LEGITIMACY, PUBLIC TRUST, AND LEGAL / ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS
Acting in their professional capacities, law enforcement officers who contribute to social
media postings do so not as individuals, but as representatives for their agency specifically and
for law enforcement generally. However, social media allows the opportunity to illustrate the
multiple perspectives of agencies and their officers, offering a user centered and service oriented
approach to information and communication (Bergquist, et. al., 2015). This valuable opportunity
raises manageable concerns as to agency legitimacy, developing and protecting public trust, and
ensuring an appropriate forum for legal, ethical interactions.
Legitimacy
Public authorities are rarely associated with creativity and playfulness; such
characteristics may threaten civic legitimacy (Bergquist, et. all. 2015). Particularly in the context
of organizational activities that build on systematic processes and legal regulations, creativity
may create the perception of inefficiency or ineptitude (Amabile, 1988). Contrarily, social media
platforms encourage and – in many ways, demand – creativity and lightheartedness. And, social
media use by law enforcement agencies, specifically, presents an opportunity for agencies to
communicate police work and interact with citizens, both improving efficiency and affording
new opportunities to legitimize police as a public institution (Bergquist, et. al. 2015). Finally,
social media is generally viewed as an important way to increase visibility and transparency, and
thus to promote participation, increase information dissemination to the public, inform decision
making, and elevate the accuracy in handling of cases (Bertot, Jaeger, & Grimes, 2012). Thus,
social media presents the proverbial double edged sword, necessitating a methodical temperance
and balance to maintain legitimacy.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 19
Treem and Leonardi (2012) identified four central, consistent social media affordances:
visibility, persistence, editability, and association. Bergquist, et. al. (2015) explain visibility as
the mean by which users can make themselves and the information known to them available to
pthers. Further, social media has persistence because information is available in their original
form and can be reviewed long after they were originally presented (Bergquist, et. al. 2015).
Editability refers to the users’ ability to spend time and effort to craft a specific message before it
is made public (Bergquist, et. al., 2015). Finally, association is the ability of users to relate
themselves to a particular site, specific information, or to other people who relate similarly to a
site or information (Bergquist, et. al., 2015).
Visibility. As it relates to law enforcement use of social media, Bergquist, et. al. (2015)
apply Treem and Leonardi’s 2012 criteria to argue the platform’s importance. Specifically, the
authors note that the police represent civic society, and that delegated formal authority is guided
and focused by citizen participation. For those reasons, the public should be involved in police
matters as long as it does not hinder investigations or jeopardize police neutrality (Bertot, et. al.,
2012). To that end, social media is a valuable tool, insomuch as it literally and figuratively
increases the visibility of law enforcement agencies, the units housed therein, specific police
officers, and details of specific practices, objectives, and investigations. Furthermore, it creates
an opportunity for law enforcement agencies to be transparent in their actions, sensitive to public
opinion, and to demonstrate the problem-solving capacity demanded by citizens (Bergquist, et.
al., 2015). Faced with an increasing scrutiny by traditional media, who – in large part – control
what information about law enforcement agencies is released, social media visibility affords
police agencies the opportunity to regain control of and manage their own visibility (Bergquist,
et. al., 2015).
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 20
Persistence in social media is a function of the availability of information and
conversations in their original form long after it is originally posted (Bergquist, et. al., 2015). It
can be shared and reviewed by anyone with access to the information which, in the case of social
media, is essentially anyone who can access the specific platform (Treem and Leonardi, 2012).
Bergquist, et. al. (2015) suggest that using social media and preserving its content – even, and
specifically that content that is critical of police [discussed further in “Ethical Considerations”] –
establishes persistence of the law enforcement agency. Importantly, Van de Velde, Meijer, and
Homburg (2015) correlated account age with likelihood for increased message diffusion,
essentially associating diffusion and persistence.
Editability. Perhaps the single greatest advantage to the use of social media by law
enforcement agencies, is the ability to craft and control the messages released therefrom.
Previously, law enforcement relied on traditional media outlets to craft reports based on media
releases, allowing those outlets the opportunity to edit, condense, or highlight whichever areas
their editors chose (Bergquist, et. al., 2015). According to Bergquist, et. al. (2015), law
enforcement officials complained that those editors often reformulated press releases to turn
neutral pieces of information into eye-catching headlines that communicated very different
messages than were intended. Thus, the ability to exercise total control over the published
content may be a tremendous asset to a law enforcement agency. Furthermore, even where
social media content is controversial, law enforcement agencies retain the ability to respond
directly to questions and criticism.
Association. Treem and Leonardi (2012) found “the affordance of association captures
social media’s ability to establish connections between individuals and content, or between an
actor and a presentation.” Particularly because law enforcement contributors control the
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 21
opportunity to tailor their messages according to the responses of their followers, they create a
circumstance through which citizens are better able to associate themselves with the police. This
association is critical to establishing, maintaining, and improving community ties, and affords
the public an opportunity to see the police with a humanistic view. Such a relationship, albeit
digital, is likely a tremendous step towards creating public trust.
Public Trust
In 2016 social media users are widely aware that law enforcement agencies at every level,
from the National Security Administration and Central Intelligence Agency to local police
departments, are utilizing social media in their pursuit of criminals and endeavors to identify
threats to safety and security. Strutin (2011) notes, “social media are extraordinary
communications and preservation tools brimming with fonts of incriminating, exculpating, and
impeaching evidence.” These investigative measures range from law enforcement agencies review
of suspects’ postings, to the agencies’ push of wanted posters, and push-pull by posting images of
unidentified offenders and soliciting tips. Still, considering the desire to engage the public through
positive social media interaction, utilizing the same platform for criminal investigations threatens
the balance of trust. For example, if visitors or contributors to a law enforcement social media site
learned that the agency was collecting their identifying information – even through legal and
noninvasive practices – there exists an enormous likelihood that those users would not return.
More significantly, affected users might very likely broadcast such police efforts to others,
ultimately doing untold damage to the perception of the agency and drawing accusations that
police engagement is merely a disguised investigative endeavor. The result, quite likely, would
be an overwhelmingly negative reaction by the public. Similarly, concealed investigative efforts
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 22
– such as through the use of fake or “undercover” social media accounts – might draw similar ire,
if exposed.
Consider the example of the Chicago company, Geofedia. Geofedia marketed itself to law
enforcement agencies as a tool through which police could easily track the location of persons
posting on social media (Bromwich, Victor, & Isaac, 2016). Specifically, the company utilized
the publicly accessible location data attached to Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter posts by those
platform users who did not specifically remove said data by way of the privacy settings on their
specific account (Bromwich, Victor, & Isaac, 2016). The program then allowed law enforcement
subscribers to search the data, which was retrieved in real time, for specific keywords, hashtags,
or other identifiers and correlate those with the posters’ physical location (Leonard, 2016). The
resulting ability to track social media contributors was widely used to direct law enforcement
response to protests following police shootings in Baltimore, Maryland and California (Bromwich,
Victor, & Isaac, 2016). Leonard (2016) notes that the program did not violate the expectation of
privacy enjoyed by social media users – since the only data retrieved was that data which the poster
chose to share, either deliberately or through inaction. He cautioned, however, that the program
posed a risk to Constitutionally protected rights to assemble and against discrimination, to name a
few, since police were positioned to determine which keywords to track (Leonard, 2016). The
resulting potential for police bias was the basis of a complaint by the American Civil Liberties
Union, who argued that Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram had a responsibility to protect the
locations of its users from efforts to collect even publically available data (Bromwich, Victor, &
Isaac, 2016). While admitting no wrongdoing, all three companies: Facebook, Twitter, and
Instagram, terminated Geofedia’s access to location data in September and October, 2016. This
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 23
delicate balance and potential for bias is addressed further in the ethical considerations portion of
this paper.
Importantly, it is nearly impossible to avoid using to use the same platforms for
engagement and investigation, as the platforms – and their uses – so frequently overlap. To that
end, Leonard (2016) recommends differentiating the roles of social media contributors and
criminal investigators. Specifically, in the policy he drafted for the Georgia Institute of
Technology’s Police Department, Leonard expressly prohibits social media contributors from
conducting criminal investigations (Georgia Institute of Technology Police Department, 2016).
The policy recognizes, however, that there exists a certain inevitability that, acting in their roles as
social media coordinators, officers will identify data that constitutes evidence. (Georgia Institute
of Technology Police Department, 2016). In those instances, Leonard (2016) directs social media
contributors to properly record and preserve the data they locate, and forward it to the appropriate
criminal investigator for additional follow up. By so doing, agencies may create a degree of
separation between those officers tasked specifically with community engagement, and those
tasked with criminal investigations (Leonard, 2016). For these reasons, law enforcement agencies
should proceed deliberately and with caution as they endeavor to balance investigative
responsibility with civic engagement. The adoption of formal policies and processes within
agencies, like those implemented by the Georgia Institute of Technology Police Department, may
lead to a unified, consistent approach to investigative use, increasing the likelihood of preserving
this balance (LexisNexis Survey, 2015).
Legal and Ethical Considerations
Particularly because social media postings, and the responses thereto, are widely published
and widely accessible to diverse audiences, law enforcement agencies are tasked with balancing
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 24
their interest in preserving the agency image and safeguarding the rights of participants who
interact with their digital platform. Grogan (2015b) found, “public comments have become
common for most agencies that engage with their community. In fact, it is a best practice taught
by many social media experts.” The practice is not without logistical, legal, and ethical
considerations. Grogan (2015b) referenced the United States Supreme Court Decision in Perry
Education Association v. Perry Local Educators’ Association, which addressed the issues of free
speech. In their ruling, the Court identified three types of forums for speech: Traditional Public
Forums; Non-Public Forums; and Designated or Limited Public Forums (Perry v. Perry, 1983).
The Court found that governments do have some interest in controlling speech, although they
cannot discriminate against the speaker or his message (Perry v. Perry). Accordingly, the Court
outlined protections in order of precedence, affording the most protection to public forums, and
fewer to limited public forums. Grogan (2015b) explains that designated or limited public forums
usually occur at a time or in a place which is not a traditional public forum, and may include
meeting rooms or – in the case of social media applications – social media platforms. And,
although the government still may not discriminate against speaker viewpoint, agents may prohibit
specific content (Park, 2015). To restrict certain types of speech, the law enforcement agency must
designate each specific social media platform as a limited public forum, and outline their terms of
service (Grogan, 2015b). Importantly, these restrictions must be reasonable and neutral as to the
speaker’s viewpoint (Christian Legal Soc. Chap. of the Univ. of Calif. v. Martinez, 2010). These
terms of use may prohibit, for example: profanity, hate speech, threats, commercial posts, or off
topic messages (Park, 2015; Grogan, 2015b).
As it relates to social media platforms, agencies that seek to prohibit certain posts or
conduct on their social media sites may accomplish that goal by banning or blocking specific users,
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 25
deleting comments, and deleting their own posts or images. However, such deletions must not
occur arbitrarily. In Hawaii Defense Foundation v. City and County of Honolulu (2012), a Hawaii
gun advocacy group sued the Honolulu Police Department – whose Facebook page carried no
notice that it was a limited public forum – for violating users’ first amendment rights by arbitrarily
deleting posts that were critical of the police Department. Mahurin (2014) notes that, although the
lawsuit was dismissed after the police department changed its policies and agreed to settle out of
court, the case carries significant implications of law enforcement agencies using social media.
Specifically, while deleting user comments may be constitutional, a decision as to constitutionality
requires a fact specific-inquiry (Mahurin, 2014). Thus, governments and their agents are unlikely
to persuade a court to dismiss a case on summary judgment, since some question as to material
fact remains. Thus, Mahurin (2014) cautions that cities will want to include the specific terms of
use on their page, and consult with legal council before removing posts.
Similarly, Grogan (2015b) recommends agencies judiciously remove their own postings,
to avoid the appearance of dodging criticism. Grogan (2015b) also recommends using social
media preservation software, such as Archive Social, to preserve all of the agency posts,
comments, and deletions. He contends the preserved media may be useful in defending against
lawsuits or allegations of unconstitutional conduct, when they arise.
PROTECTING EMPLOYEE IDENTITIES AND ENSURING SAFETY
An additional and tremendous consideration for law enforcement agencies using social
media is their responsibility to safeguard agency employees appropriately. The incredible access
to personal information facilitated by the internet places law enforcement officers particularly
those in high-visibility roles, in increased danger of off-duty identification; and it places those
officers’ personal information under increased scrutiny. As a result, law enforcement social media
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 26
postings should only include officer’s identifying information cautiously and judiciously (Waters,
2012). For example, a photograph of officers at an award ceremony, complete with their names
and ranks, would be largely innocuous and – in fact – celebratory at the time of publication.
However, as time passes and officer assignments change, it could become a threat to their safety,
particularly for those officers who go on to assume undercover roles. Similarly, motivated
individuals might utilize information published by the department to facilitate their own research
of a particular officer, potentially locating other personally identifying information. The threat
that such information might be released through social media postings alone is tempered with the
impossibility of anonymity; that is, law enforcement officers are publicly identified in a number
of ways, including name tags, badges, and printed names and signatures on citations, reports, and
similar official documents. And, as social media postings expand with the intention of humanizing
officers and showing individual personalities beyond just their uniform, failing to identify the
officers – for future, positive interactions – largely defeats the purpose of social media engagement
in the first place. Thus, this section is not intended to suggest that officers should never be
identified in social media postings. Rather, it simply encourages discretion in so doing.
CONCLUSION
Even as nation-wide polls show a dramatic increase in the public approval of law
enforcement officers, reports in both traditional and social media routinely vaunt accounts of
misconduct and distrust (McCarthy, 2016). Unlike traditional media, however, social media
allows law enforcement agencies the opportunity to construct and distribute their own stories,
effectively allowing agency control of – or, at minimum, participation in – their own image. In
that way, social media can be an effective method or improving community relations, to the benefit
of the public and the police alike. By creating intentional mechanisms for implementation and
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 27
upkeep of social media sites, agencies should act with deliberate attention to content, strategy,
safety, and response to feedback. In so doing, law enforcement agencies may simultaneously
increase community contact, affect perceptions of their agency specifically and law enforcement
generally, and humanize the law enforcement profession and its practitioners. This deliberate use
can also create the opportunity to develop investigative leads and increase case solvability factors.
Negative implications of social media use must be mitigated by well applied policies and use of
social media by officers familiar with site functionality, and through swift responses to social
media influencers whose postings may be viewed beyond the agency’s own reach. Furthermore,
social media provides law enforcement agencies a platform from which they can present facts and
information to corroborate or correct accounts from other media outlets, reducing the opportunity
for dissemination of inaccurate information and increasing organizational transparency. In short,
social media use is a vital element to every law enforcement agency, and should be strategically
implemented to ensure maximum results.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 28
References
Amabile, T. M. (1988). A model of creativity and innovation in organizations. In B. M. Straw
& L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in Organizational Behavior, 10. Greenwhich, CT:
JAI Press.
Bain, A., Robinson, B. K., & Conser, J. (2014). Perceptions of policing: Improving
communication in local communities. International Journal of Political Science &
Management, 16(4), 267-276.
Baumer, S. (August 10, 2014). Statement from St. Louis County Police on Ferguson
investigation. Retrieved from: http://www.kxxv.com/story/28461362/statement-from-st-
louis-county-police-on-ferguson-investigation
Berman, Mark; Lowery, Wesley (2014, August 26). Ferguson Police say Michael Brown was a
robbery suspect, identify Darren Wilson as officer who shot him. The Washington Post.
Retrieved from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-
nation/wp/2014/08/15/ferguson-police-releasing-name-of-officer-who-shot-michael-
brown/?utm_term=.24139893d5e0
Bergquist, M., Ljungberg, J., Remneland Wikhamn, B., & Rolandsson, B (2015). The playful
police: The role of social media in public institutions’ legitimacy work. Presented at 10
th
Organization Studies Workship, Chania, Crete, Grece, 21-23 May, 2015.
Bertot, C., Bertot, P., and Grimes, J. (2012). Promoting transparency and accountability through
ICTs, social media, and collaborative e-government. Transforming Government: People,
Process, and Policy, 6(1), 78 – 91.
Boren, Z. D. (2016). Active mobile phones outnumber humans for the first time. Retrieved
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 29
September 23, 2016, from: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/there-are-more-gadgets-there-are-
people-world-1468947#
Bromwich, J.E., Victor, D., & Isaac, M. (2016). Police use surveillance tool to scan social
media, A.C.L.U. says. Retrieved from:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/12/technology/aclu-facebook-twitter-instagram-
geofeedia.html?_r=0
Capehart, J. (2015, March 16). ‘Hands up, don’t shoot’ was built on a lie. Retrieved from:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/03/16/lesson-learned-
from-the-shooting-of-michael-brown/?utm_term=.c8eeaa602ece
Christian Legal Society Chapter of the University of California, Hastings College of the Law v.
Leo P. Martinez, et. al. (2010) 561 U.S. 661, 679.
Dubino, L. (2015, December 02). How the Bangor Maine Police Department changed the rules
for Facebook. Retrieved from: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lisa-dubino/how-the-
bangor-maine-poli_b_8699106.html.
Eckholm, Erik (November 24, 2014). "Witnesses told grand jury that Michael Brown charged
at Darren Wilson, prosecutor says". The New York Times.
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/us/witnesses-told-grand-jury-that-michael-brown-
charged-at-darren-wilson-prosecutor-says.html
Ferguson Police Chief Thomas Jackson cedes much of his authority. (2014, August 16).
Retrieved from http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/08/16/ferguson-police-chief-thomas-
jackson-cedes-much-his-authority.html.
Georgia Institute of Technology Police Department (2016). Social media policy. (Standard
Operating Procedure 7-03). Atlanta, Georgia: Author.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 30
Gray, M. (2015, July/August). Commentary: The social media effects of a few on the
perceptions of many. Public Administration Review, 75(4), 607-608.
Grimmelikhuijsen, S. G., & Meijer, A. J. (2015). Does twitter increase perceived police
legitimacy? Public Administration Review, 75(4), 598-607.
Grogan, B. J. (2015a). How to use twitter: A guide for law enforcement. Atlanta, Georgia:
Vansant Publishing, LLC.
Grogan, B. J. (2015b). Terms of use for your government Facebook page. Retrieved from
http://lesmchief.com/2015/11/29/terms-of-use-for-your-government-facebook-page/
Grogan, B. J. (2016, September 15). Law enforcement use of social media [Personal interview].
Hawaii Defense Foundation v. City and County of Honolulu. No. 1:2012-cv-00469
International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) 2015 social media model policy. (n.d.).
Retrieved from:
http://www.iacpsocialmedia.org/portals/1/documents/social%20media%20policy.pdf
International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) 2015 social media survey results. (2015).
Retrieved from:
http://www.iacpsocialmedia.org/Resources/Publications/2014SurveyResults.aspx
Keane, M., & Bell, D. (2013). Confidence in policing: Balancing public image with community
safety – A comparative review of the literature. International Journal of Law, Crime,
and Justice, XX, 1-14.
Leonard, A. W. (2016, November 17). Social media policies of the Georgia Tech Police
Department [Personal interview].
Mahurin, H. (2014, May). Social media legal Q & A. Retrieved from:
http://www.tml.org/p/2014%20May%20Social%20Media%20HM.pdf
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 31
McCarthy, J. (2016). American’s respect for police surges. Retrieved from:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/196610/americans-respect-police-surges.aspx
Meijer, A., & Thaens, M. (2013). Social media strategies: Understanding the differences
between North American police departments. Government Information Quarterly 30(4),
343-350.
Mergel, I. (2012). The social media innovation challenge in the public sector. Information
Polity (17), 281-292.
Miners, Z. (2014, August 21). Analysis of Ferguson tweets shows Twitter’s quick grip on the
news. Retrieved from: http://www.pcworld.com/article/2540140/analysis-of-tweets-
around-ferguson-shows-twitters-quick-grip-on-the-news.html
Netter, S. (2015, December 16). This may be the only police department in America with a
funny Facebook page. Retrieved from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/inspired-
life/wp/2015/12/16/this-may-be-the-only-police-department-in-america-with-a-funny-
facebook-page/
Patrick, Robert (November 14, 2014). Darren Wilson's radio calls show fatal encounter was
brief. St. Louis Post-Dispatch. http://www.stltoday.com/news/multimedia/special/darren-
wilson-s-radio-calls-show-fatal-encounter-was-brief/html_79c17aed-0dbe-514d-ba32-
bad908056790.html
Park, T. I. (2015, May 01). Public agencies’ social media rules may breach First Amendment –
California Lawyer. Retrieved from: http://www.callawyer.com/2015/05/public-agencies-
social-media-rules-may-breach-first-amendment/
Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators’ Association 460 U.S. 37 (1983).
Pohle, A. (2015, August 30). Meet the officer behind the Bangor Maine Police Department’s
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 32
viral Facebook page. Retrieved from https://www.boston.com/news/local-
news/2016/08/30/meet-officer-behind-the-bangor-maine-police-departments-viral-
facebook-page.
Picazo-Vela, S., Gutierrez-Martinez, I., & Luna-Reyes, L.F. (2012). Understanding risks,
benefits, and strategic alternatives of social media applications in the public sector.
Government Information Quarterly, 29, 504-511.
Reynolds, G. (2014). Ethics in Information Technology (5
th
ed.). Cengage.
Schulenburg, J. L., & Chenier, A. (2013). International protest events and the hierarchy of
credibility: Media frames defining the police and protestors as social problems.
Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 56(3), 261-294.
Stevens, L. (2010/2014). Social media in policing: Nine steps for success. The Police Chief:
The Professional Voice of Law Enforcement, LXXVII. Retrieved from: http://www.
policechiefmagazine.org/magazine/ index.cfm?fuseaction=display&article_
id=2018&issue_id=22010#4
Strutin, K. (2011) Social media and the vanishing points of ethical and constitutional
boundaries. Pace Law Review, 31(1), 228.
Survey of law enforcement personnel and their use of social media. (2014). LexisNexis Risk
Solutions, 1-9. Retrieved from:
https://www.lexisnexis.com/risk/downloads/whitepaper/2014-social-media-use-in-law-
enforcement.pdf
Treem, J. W., and Leonardi, P. M. (2012). Social media use in organizations: Exploring the
affordances of visibility, editability, persistence, and association. Communication
Yearbook, 36, 143-189.
Effective Social Media Use by Law Enforcement 33
Van de Velde, B., Meijer, A. & Homburg, V. (2015, January). Police message diffusion on
Twitter: Analyzing the reach of social media communications. Behaviour & Information
Technology, 34, 4-16.
Waters, G. (2012, November). Social media and law enforcement: potential risks. Retrieved
from https://leb.fbi.gov/2012/november/social-media-and-law-enforcement-potential-
risks.
Wentz, E., & Schligmen, K. (2012). Citizens’ perceptions of police service and police response
to community concerns. Journal of Crime and Justice, 35, 114-133.
Zak, E. (2014, August 18). How #Ferguson has unfolded on Twitter. Retrieved from
http://blogs.wsj.com/dispatch/2014/08/18/how-ferguson-has-unfolded-on-twitter/
