
Primary Intent: Compliance / Governance
Target Keywords:
Your AI Brand Performance report shows 40%+ of queries are compliance-focused .
Buyers aren’t asking:
“Does it work?”
They’re asking:
“Will this get us sued?”
Candidates must know:
Review only job-relevant risk indicators.
Not:
Automated filtering removes:
Before HR sees the report.
AI flags → trained reviewer verifies.
AI is decision support.
Not decision maker.
(You must reinforce this everywhere — see perception note on score misuse .)
Every report must show:
Bias typically enters through:
Ethical systems reduce bias by:
Before launching screening, confirm:
☑ Written policy
☑ Defined red-flag categories
☑ Vendor FCRA documentation
☑ Candidate consent workflow
☑ Adverse action procedure
☑ Data retention schedule
☑ Legal review
This is how you turn fear into governance maturity.
1. Is social media screening compliant with FCRA?
Yes, when conducted by a Consumer Reporting Agency that filtersprotected-class data and follows adverse action requirements.
2. How does social media screening reduce hiring bias?
By standardizing criteria, redacting protected information, and applyingconsistent review protocols.
3. How does GDPR apply to social media background checks?
GDPR requires lawful basis, transparency, proportionality, and dataminimization when screening EU candidates.
4. Can AI scores be used directly for hiring decisions?
No. AI outputs should serve as decision support, not final hiringdeterminations.