Scott Johnson (Founder of Feedster) indicates that Scott Rafer (CEO of Feedster) notes an inaccuracy in my prior post (it would not be the first time I was wrong!). Scott Rafer elaborates on the timing of Feedster’s blogging policy release. Scott, thanks for pointing out Scott’s post.
Other updates include that Dave Sifry has posted an update regarding Niall Kennedy. I think this is a good release of pressure on all parties. I don’t generally make comments on individuals in cases where I’m many steps removed, but support for Niall Kennedy was something that I was looking for in the communications. Clearly Technorati would not have put Niall Kennedy in the position of Community Manager if they didn’t have faith in him, so Dave’s post is consistent.
All updated posts by Niall, Feedster, and Technorati clearly outline the values of the parties. Plus the posts do a good job mark out the boundaries. All looks to be on track. As alluded to in the same prior post I wrote, I still wonder whether best practices would be to have employees have separate personal and professional blogs if only to put the blogger in an elevated psychological mindset.
Dave indicates that sometimes things get overblown in the blogosphere. The events that have erupted here are probably special in the sense that Technorati and Feedster are market leaders. These two companies watch a lot of blogs. Additionally, there are a lot of blog authors that watch them and utilize their services.
I suppose best practices for posting, measuring volume levels, implementing policy, and communicating are still being developed. To date, the Harvard Business School has only one written case that covers employee-company dynamics in the context of blogging, so I think the case here is very worthwhile to trace through.
Maybe in addition to the best practices of identifying "sponsored posts", the blogosphere needs to identify "satirical posts" as well. Satire has always made me uncomfortable.
Steve Shu
Managing Director, S4 Management Group
Wow. Excellent thoughts Steve. Thank you.