Within the contemporary digital hiring landscape, employers often review applicants' social media profiles to learn more about a candidate before proceeding with personnel selection. Literature on this practice notes serious legal and ethical risks which hiring professionals themselves are also well aware of. A recent development in employee screening is the establishment of contracted third-party providers which offer to conduct these screenings on the employer's behalf, attempting to act as a viable, and less volatile, alternative to manual social media review. This research utilizes content analysis of the promotional materials from leading social media review providers to determine their argument for their own legitimacy and utility in the modern hiring market. Interview material from conversations with hiring professionals is used to contextualize and compare these claims. The textual content analysis reveals that discussions of ethics and legality among these providers are couched within a larger context of professional anxiety. The hiring officer, as an extension of the employer, is presented as a sole determinant of the amount of risk endured by a company through a hiring decision. This risk is presented through narratives of violence potentially incurred by a employee as well as the steep costs associated with litigation, (re-)hiring, and employer reputational damages. Still, the providers are not forthcoming regarding the extent Fair Credit Reporting Act and Equal Employment Opportunity law guidelines impact their product and how hiring officers may use it. The hiring professional perspectives share doubts about the utility of these screenings as tools to their own processes. These doubts are likely influenced by both the respondents' unfamiliarity with the tool, and their confidence in their own established skill and professional methodology. Finally, this research proposes that social media screening tools are posed to play an important role for employers receiving high volumes of comparable candidates within the surge of unemployed college graduates since 2018. These screening services may become commonplace in hiring, stay regulated to certain industries, or fade into obscurity entirely if their claim to utility is not upheld by their users. Further research is needed to represent not only the promotional intent of the providers, but the perspectives of hiring professionals and applicants alike.