Not long ago, the Chicago Tribune ran a small article on how Milwaukee police were adopting social networking websites such as Twitter to keep the populace informed of emergencies, evacuations, crime prevention tips, etc.

“Latest homicide in the city is NOT a random act. Male, 33, shot in 1500 block N.39. More details as we have them,” the police station tweeted, thus demonstrating the activism that Milwaukee’s finest aspires to when it comes to the safety and well being of their city.

On the surface, this sounds pretty cool. How could anyone object to this kind of well meaning information being distributed? It’s fast. It’s free. And it’s elective (you can’t receive a Tweet unless you have ‘befriended’ the person sending it). In fact, I can see how school administrations, traffic watchers, fire departments, hospitals and other municipal groups would love to have such networks in place as early as tomorrow. We’re on the verge of reinventing the Emergency Broadcast System to being instantaneous — in 115 words or less.

I say, “Think twice. Tweet once.” For me, there’s a dark cloud hovering over this shiny, modern mega-pixel moment.

In the same article, an incident in Texas had very different intentions. Attorneys shut down a phony Twitter account called “Austin PD” that had 450 followers and bore the official city seal. While the incident turned out to be a harmless prank, it demonstrates the growing reliance on social networking as a means of communication and source of information. And what is to become of such media if the sources cannot be trusted.

Currently, there are no mandated procedures in place to review and monitor misrepresentation on social networking sites. Admittedly, the time and manpower to enforce such rules would be enormous. And where do you draw the line on factual representation? It’s obvious to say it's illegal to call yourself a police officer, judge or doctor. But is it a crime to say you’ve graduated from a university you never attended? Or held a position you never worked at? What were once considered white lies on resumes are now considered even lesser offenses on the Internet. At least for now.

And even if there were rules and regulations that could be enforced, there’s still the issue of libel, slander or misquoting. What would happen if a police officer were to prematurely Tweet the wrong description? What if a disgruntled employee were to tap out a false accusation about their boss? Who’s accountable for declaring a school closed that isn’t really closed? And what if the perpetrator should Tweet an apology or a rebuttal hours later — the damage has been done.

There’s nothing on the law books today to deal with these virtual missteps. To date, most Tweeting these days can be viewed in the same context as ‘drunken dialing’ — spur of the moment thoughts that sounded good in my head, but sound stupid just after I press the send button. But telling 3,564 people that you love the White Sox is not the same as a crime watch group informing the public that “Leo Smith, rehabilitated child pedophile, has moved into your neighborhood.” Especially when the informant meant to type in Leo Smity.

Don’t think this can happen? I can tell you it happens more than you think.

As long as humans are involved, mistakes and malicious behavior are inevitable. That’s why having instantaneous access to thousands of eyes and minds should not be taken lightly. With great social networking comes great responsibility. And I’m not sure we’re ready to be trusted just yet.

Thanks to Carrie Antlfinger, Associated Press for the Tribune article.

Read More In: News, Rumors, Gossip, & Trends Innovation Discussion Future Trends Innovation Community Ideas