Okay, what's the biggest advantage to blogging (as opposed to, say, keeping a personal journal)? It's publicly accessible, on the Internet, to those who want to find it.

Which means, of course, that if you start talking about how all the management at Company X is a bunch of corrupt cretins, or how your corporation, AcmeCo, dumps PCBs into baby formula, or what the secret formula to FizzyPop, where you work, is, then, guess what? That's visible on the Internet, too. And, sooner or later, someone is going to find it and probably fire your ass.

Now, you may say, "But I don't talk about anything actionable. I mention where I work, I show photos of my office, I tell harmless anecdotes ..."

Most companies are pretty strict about information about the firm getting out. There's a variety of reasons -- competitive advantage, legal liability, intellectual property issues, fear of law enforcement, whatever. But most companies are pretty unforgiving of such things.

Would your company object if you spoke directly with a reporter from the NY Times, and what you said was posted on their front page? If so, then you're effectively doing the same thing online. (And, even if not, are you sure?)

I do talk about my work here, but I try to be very careful. I never use real names (of management or of staff). I never speak of actual projects (internal or external), except on occasion when I mention publicly available info. I don't even think I've mentioned the actual company I work for here on this blog (though you could probably dig it up with a bit of effort). That is, perhaps, CYA paranoia, but it's also courtesy -- and, as a stockholder in the firm, I also have an interest in not mentioning anything that could possibly harm the company.

Just a thought for my fellow blogging cohorts.

Filed under :: Blogging :: Job Jollies
Link · Print · Edit · TR/G

Read about QotS last month on the BBC. Not as amusing as Washingtonne's site was, but still worth the word of caution in regards to what you blog. From what it sounds like, the only thing that got QotS in trouble were the photo's.

Kinda like what scott did with where he worked last year. Only blogging about it after he left it.

After the fact, all you have to worry about is libel and violating any contractual confidentiality agreements ...

Airline companies have been particularly (overly?) sensitive about publicity of any sorts. I think they handled this case poorly, and blaming the victim is unfair -- but it wasn't an unpredictable event, either.