When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro. - Hunter S. Thompson

09 February 2005

Blog at your own risk

Yesterday's Christian Science Monitor runs a pretty well-informed article about bloggers getting fired for blogging about their workplaces.
[Fired journalist Rachel Mosteller] learned a valuable lesson: If you have a job, blog at your own risk - "unless you're writing recipes and about how much you love puppies and kittens," Ms. Mosteller says.
Okay, that puppy and kitten stuff is hitting a little close to home here, and I have so far refrained from posting my cornbread and pound cake recipes (any requests?) but she's got a pretty good point: if you go out on a limb in your blog, and especially if you blog about work, don't be surprised if there are consequences to be paid.

The CSM article was okay, but even a cursory glance around the blogosphere reveals that blog-related firings have been a trend for some time now. PopeMark, over at The Papal Bull, has compiled a list of fired bloggers (see also the update here) going back a couple of years.

Somehow, the author of the CSM story failed to notice and interview Heather Armstrong, who blogs at Dooce. Heather's firing a few years back gave rise to the term "dooced," meaning "to be fired for blogging."

And CSM missed a highly relevant news peg: Google (which, ironically, owns and operates Blogger, the host of enrevanche and millions of other blogs) just fired a recently hired employee, Mark Jen, for blogging about working at Google (blog still active, but "objectionable" material apparently removed.)

Generally speaking, I am not too impressed by anonymous blogging; I made the decision to go "open kimono" when I started my blog, and I tend to have more respect for people who are willing to sign their name to their opinions.

But if you're going to blog about work, both anonymity and a modicum of active deception about the details you share with your readers would seem to be prudent.

No comments: