A good story in MediaPost which primarily covers Robert Scoble's "scathing critique" of his own company (that would be Microsoft) on his blog regarding MSN Spaces' decision to pull a consumer's Chinese weblog.
We all heard of being dooced, but this is the exact opposite i.e. a blogging employee taking an explicit/visible position against his/her employee.
But here's the kicker...it's not a bad thing. For starters, once it's out in the open (a lesson in of itself to corporate bloggers), any overt action by the employer (other than actually addressing the issue) is likely to be a PR-minefield. I'm certainly not advocating this move as it is somewhat akin to walking a tightrope without a safety net, but certainly Robert is a rolemodel (exception, rather than norm perhaps....) to us all.
The bottom line is that it is an opportunity waiting to be capitalized. No less. At the very minimum, it gives the company in question the chance to explain itself.
In addition and conversely, any corporate blog/ger that is only complimentary and touchy-feely about the employer is likely to be discounted and/or rejected by the audience.
Even this article - which essentially deals with a negative story - is told in a relatively positive light on behalf of Microsoft. Pete Blackshaw puts it best:
"Robert Scoble is a one-man counterpoint to the argument that Microsoft is a close-minded, evil company," he said. "Even if you believe he crossed the line on this, he's still such a net positive for Microsoft."
Steve Rubel also weighs in with some words of wisdom.
