A Curious Silence
Are you loyal? Will you speak the truth? Will you speak through formal channels or air ideas and thoughts without institutional editing? Are bloggers inherently untrustworthy because they vent and embarrass persons and institutions? What sort of editing filter should a blogger who works within and institution impose upon himself/herself?
"Wired" magazine, "Fast Company" and "The Economist", "Yahoo" and Google" all argue for open and transparent leadership, including blogging by and about leadership and structure. Proprietary confidentialities must be maintained, but open discussions about trends and directions are encouraged and invited. "Apple" does not encourage blogging, especially by employees or contractors. A "cone of silence" sits around these companies.
A staff person once accused me of using my blog as a form of passive aggressiveness, choosing to assign blame without ever talking to the person face-to-face. That's an easy temptation. For me to have integrity with the staff I work with, they must know that any issue I have with them is first of all dealt with face-to-face. And even then, because of confidentiality and the integrity of a relationship, it does not enter the blog. I think the same thing goes for my family members. My family's issues must not become fodder for the public. But does that hold true to institutions like the local church, conference, denomination, agencies, camps and committees? I don't think so. What do you think? What costs have you paid for blogging (you can post anonymously if you wish)?