The blogosphere is buzzing over CNN firing a producer for blogging. The chatter ranges from conversations around freedom of speech to a dissection of his blog posts, and emotions range from anger over the unfairness of it all to glee from those who are have a differing political viewpoint. I first heard about this on Thursday, and my initial reaction was one of surprise. It seems very 2002 for a media property to fire someone over blogging, especially given blog readership and how many media outlets are encouraging their journalists to blog more. But then I read some of the producer’s posts, both on his personal blog and on Huffington Post. He covers topics with a strong personal point of view and no mincing of words, and could leave readers wondering how his personal perspective influences his work for CNN. To be fair, I don’t believe he had ever disclosed his employer on his blog, but he also didn’t have any disclaimers protecting them either.

So did he deserve to be fired? That isn’t for me to say. I’m curious to know what others think. In the meantime, it did make me realize how critical it is for companies to develop and distribute a policy on employee blogging. What are the rules of engagement, and what are the consequences for violating them? At Burson-Marsteller we encourage employees to participate in social media, although have a few guidelines that must be followed:

• If blogging personally about topics related to the PR or communications industry, we ask for a disclaimer indicating the point of view is personal and not on behalf of the firm.
• If blogging on behalf of the company, the blog must be reviewed before being launched for relevance, and then guidelines are in place around not mentioning clients without their permission, not disclosing confidential information, etc.
• We insist on full transparency when blogging on behalf of the company, and strongly recommend it for personal blogging and social media activities.
• We are willing to coach clients on topics and editorial style, but recommend they do their own writing for blogs. It really is different than other activities we conduct such as speech writing or internal communications.
• We support and abide by the Word of Mouth Marketing Association ethics code around social media participation.

There are other points to the policy, but so much of this is common sense. Companies should develop policies with input from various groups - legal, human resources, regulatory (if applicable), digital, sales, marketing, etc. A frank outline of the risks and opportunities, with a discussion around acceptable behavior can save both companies and employees from difficult scenarios in the long run.

For the record, this post is my personal opinion, and doesn’t necessarily represent the opinions of Burson-Marsteller or WPP.

Update: This story is also covered on “For Immediate Release“. Listen here.

I read on CNN yesterday about Yahoo and Google planning to offer social networking applications through their email page functions. Both companies have already made significant strides in allowing users to customize their home pages and aggregate content and functionality from various sites into a personal portal page.  However, I think that email is at odds with social networking given that email is inherently a personal communication.  Sure, I can block content from being seen by the world on social networking sites, but content is largely available to people I’ve marked as friends. Email is often more transactional then social, and that is a significant difference. I get the point about my email contacts being the genesis of my social graph, but no offense, there are some folks in my contacts database that I prefer to communicate with only on an as necessary and transactional basis.  Now, having widgets that tie my social networking information into my Google home page would be something I’d really go for. I’m all for the idea of a centralized home page that is aggregated, and eventually curated, just for and by me.  But leave my email account alone.