I learned that lesson all too well. That's why there's no mention of any of my online hangouts on my LinkedIn profile. - Helen Sventitsky

It's tough - I am much more careful on my blog these days than when I started and worked for nobody. - Bora Zivkovic

It's really hard, as a blogger, and knowing big bloggers, working for companies like this - there are times I see a scoop with my company, but have to keep my mouth shut. At the same time, I have to keep my mouth shut with my closest friends as well because they could always blog about it as well. - Jesse Stay

True, but then that's a major part of the reason I started. And Silva doesn't preview anything before I post it - and we have been known to disagree. ;-) - Bill Sanders

personally, the idea that outside of work you represent your place of work is something that I find quite obnoxious. It's effectively saying that the company owns you - like fuck does it. When I'm at work THAT is when I'm representing the company that I choose to work for. When outside of work I don't talk about the place I just carry on being me. Now, if my blog was also about the same things the company I work for does or if it's talking about where I work then yes, you are sorta representing it. - alphaxion

alphaxion if you go to a bar and you are wearing a company shirt you are still representing that company. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. I've seen executives get fired (happened at NEC) for what they wrote in a web forum (without even talking about NEC or using an NEC email or anything like that). I've seen other employees get fired because they were at an industry party and hit on someone inappropriately after getting drunk. You can get fired for a whole raft of behaviors. - Robert Scoble

alphaxion, continued, just because you say "I'm off work and not representing the company" won't save your behind if you are someone the company doesn't want representing them anymore. Same online (even worse, because it's so public). If you behave in a way that isn't reflective of how the company wants you to behave, you'll get fired and all your protestations of "it's my own time" won't matter one bit. Especially in a state like Washington which is an "at will" state (which is where Dare works). - Robert Scoble

a dick is still a dick regardless of where they are at that moment.. I can understand if you're still wearing company uniforms plus the hitting on someone incident - they were at an industry event and so technically weren't off duty. The forum post sacking is abusive by the company in my eyes. My own personal view is that you should be allowed to be youself when outside of situations that involve the company you work for. If a company were to try and stifle my right to be me I would leave them. - alphaxion

That's not to say I don't understand why some take this stance, I just personally object to it on a deep level. It is very reminescent of slavery in my eyes - I feel it's almost time to have to legislate or create guidlines at the least on where a company ends and where the individual begins. But if you're flying the flag for your place of work then yes you are representing them. If you're doing something completely unconnected then the company deserves no right to get in the way. - alphaxion

alphaxion: it was a racist post by an executive. So I don't think it was abusive. That is someone I wouldn't want running my company either and it wouldn't matter that it was just their personal opinion. It demonstrated that they weren't compatible with a modern company. I agree, but with Dare's blog it's pretty tightly tied to industry commentary. That puts it firmly inside the firewall, the way you'd be judged if you spoke at an industry conference. - Robert Scoble

If it was tied to industry commentary then it's not seperate to the company they work for.. but if it held zero connection then it is an abuse. I am a firm believer in freedom of speech regardless of what a person has to say - even if I find what they have to say abhorrent, I'd rather I knew who the bigots were than force them to keep silent. But if they're doing it in the name of the company they work for then there is a problem because they are speaking someone other than themselves. - alphaxion

alphaxion: I disagree. Freedom of speech does NOT include "freedom from consequences." Freedom of speech is something that we use to keep government out of our lives. It does not extend to corporations. - Robert Scoble

My husband worked in a certain small and kind of famous sandwich shop for over 20 years...so long, that most people thought he owned the place. (didn't help that the company logo looked a lot like my husband) Everywhere we went, they associated his face with the sandwich shop and would point and call out the name of the place. It didn't matter where we went. We could be pulling into a gas station 3 states away, while on vacation...they would recognize him and associate him with the place he worked. - April Russo

(continued) About 10 years ago, my husband finally quit. Because people associated his face with the place and so many thought he owned it, the shop lost a lot of business after he left. Customers thought it was sold and showed their loyalty to the "original" by never coming back. Today, 10 years later, people still point and shout out the name of the place when they see my husband's face. The shop is gone, closed up and torn down...but he's still "representing" the company, whether he likes it or not. - April Russo

Freedom of speech does not obsolve you from consequences. If you blog with any aspect of your company's equipment/identity then you are representing your company. In every other aspect of private blogging, you are still governed by your company ethics, intellectual property rules (about publishing information) and NDAs directly, and indirectly by the fact that everything you say will be held for and against you always - that last bit is pure human behaviour - Ian D. Nock

In other words, you cannot say sh*t about your company, their competitors and even the companies who have a hint of a relationship to your company without being held accountable regardless. - Ian D. Nock

Ian is right. That said, Microsoft was a very good place to blog. Its culture appreciates people who have different points of view and Gates loves it when people show him how the competition is beating it up. - Robert Scoble

There should *never* be something that is exempt from freedom of speech. Now I never said that that speech be free from consequence, since I do agree that if you're doing something stupid while at an event etc then yes. And NDA's are a given that you don't break them whereever you are, since they are contracts you chose to be bound to. But this should never stop a person speaking their mind in situations where the company isn't directly involved and a person should be free to criticise (cont) - alphaxion

(cont) and bring up malpractice. Corporations are forever stretching into the personal lives of their employees and even into setting government policy.. they should *never* be exempt. - alphaxion

What if you were blogging long before you worked for your employer? Does that mean that once you commence employment somewhere, everything you wrote before you started now represents your employer's views? - Andrea See

this is why we need to make the distinction between personal views and when a person is an extention of a company. These can and will over lap and where necessary, the individual needs their speech protected just as much as a company needs to look out for itself. There needs to be balance instead of a company effectively owning a person. - alphaxion

Andrea, I could see a company using something that a person blogged as a reason not to hire that person. But after hiring, I would think that any respectable company would only see the blog posts after hire as representative of them. - Chris Menning

My 2 cents, Robert you are dead-on correct on the reality. Whether you agree or disagree, this is reality. When working for a company, especially in an at-will state, they can terminate your "contract" at any point unless specific provisions have been made to effect this. I proudly represent my company, even though I have a disclaimer. My opinions are not necessarily my own, but my present employer supports my opinions and I support their outlook. It is a good marriage, as I assume your blog is, Robert. - Ken Stewart | ChangeForge

(continued), However, the reality is that if ever the marriage becomes inconvenient, it can be absolved. The way in which this is handled depends upon 2 main factors: 1) your relationship with those in decision-making positions, and 2) the nature and seriousness of the infraction. Freedom of speech does not extend to the corporate world because the company pays you for certain services - one of which is not necessarily to open your mouth ;-) Great thread all. - Ken Stewart | ChangeForge

small correction: My opinions ARE necessarily my own, but not my employers ;-) Freudian slip, I wonder? - Ken Stewart | ChangeForge

ken: maybe it should extend to the corporate world. We know of many companies that will exploit workers for as much as it can get away with. As I said, I do agree that if someone is flying the flag for the company and does something unacceptable then there more than likely will be a consequence. But if they are them, outside of company sphere then the persons speech should be protected. - alphaxion

Re: Alphasxion's 'there should never be something that is exempt from freedom of speech' - sorry libel, slander and hate speech is exempt in my book - Ian D. Nock

Sorry rethought my comment - yes there is free speech in those areas, say them, there is then freedom to be prosecuted and consequences to be felt. - Ian D. Nock

@ian and in many circumstances the consequences are fitting.. It's just freedom of speech is one of those ideals I stand firmly for and I hate to see anything that says "you are not allowed to say that" - it's an ideological viewpoint. I'd rather have my haters and bigots where I can see them and educate them. It doesn't mean I don't want there to be consequences to what they say, but I defend their right to say it. - alphaxion

alphaxion, In some sense I would tend to agree. However, you must understand that when you work for a company you agree to a contract. If there is no NDA or NC agreements in place, then there is the corporate handbook to which you must bounce your ideas against. In many corporate handbooks there is text to the effect that doing anything that would bring disgrace upon the company would be cause for dismissal. By agreeing to take money from the company you are agreeing to the terms of your arrangement. - Ken Stewart | ChangeForge

(continued) - again, each state/country will have its different regulations as to whether this is fair or not. I can speak from my state's experience that whether it is right or wrong - I can be fired for just about any reason. There are a few reasons such as discrimination that I could file suit on... so then the question goes back to whether the environment was hostile and caused you to speak your mind (aka whistleblower). - Ken Stewart | ChangeForge

I know, & I said that NDA's go without saying. I'm bringing up my opinion that maybe companies are going a little too far in controlling the people that work for them. I'm fully aware that this is an ideological standpoint and not a realistic one, in which compromise would need to be made (ala hate speech etc). I also don't have a problem with companies using online activities when interviewing people to check on the character of a person, just as a potential employee needs to do the same to them. - alphaxion

Alphaxion, I can see your point to some extent as you are making the case for a proverbial opportunity for a black-list. This is very real... Much like Girls Gone Wild, what you do what constitutes as public view is for public consumption and judgment. For better or worse, it is highly available now. I wrote this a while back on this topic: http://www.changeforge.com/2008... - Ken Stewart | ChangeForge

Unfettered speech is a little like unfettered capitalism... always someone takes advantage too much and brings it all crashing down - Ian D. Nock from twhirl