Ethical blogging & employer rights
‘To each and every one of you – take note of what has happened here and be afraid.’
– World Weary Detective (WWD)
Anonymous work blogger, World Weary Detective, has quit in a fit of hyperbole after his employer, the Metropolitan Police, issued guidance for bloggers.
On the face of it, this sounds a bit Big Brother-ish. Yet the guidance – as quoted by WWD – appears perfectly reasonable. The Met merely asks that the, ‘impact of expressing views and opinions that are damaging to the organisation or bring the organisation into disrepute’ be considered. Bloggers do exercise a degree of power and it’s right for the Met to encourage blogging employees to act responsibility.
Anonymous bloggers may not be who they claim to be. Genuine work bloggers may have access to confidential information, that concerns not just their employer but individuals who deserve a right to privacy. The shield of anonymity can enable cowardly acts of betrayal.
A sensible employer will recognise these concerns and, rather than attempt to ban blogging, offer guidance to help employees understand the ethical dilemmas. That’s just what the Met appears to have done. The alternative would be to wait for an alleged police blogger to make a terrible error – claim they faked evidence or that a burglary victim’s better off as they were ‘insured anyway’ or a rape victim ‘asked for it’ – and all police will be tarred by that brush.
If the World Weary Detective can’t guarantee he (or she) will blog responsibly, then it’s probably right that they retire.
Contact Stephen Newton
Comments (5 comments)
So if someone in Burma or China blogs something that the state feels it brings their regime into disrepute it’s OK to use whatever measures to shut them down?
I bet you support Tony Blair and this Government don’t you.
Anonymous / March 5th, 2006, 9:59 pm / #
The comparison between WWD and Chinese dissidents is rather hysterical and WWD is no more worthy of that label than Prince Charles!
It would be nice if anyone could say whatever they wanted whenever they wanted to whomever they wanted, but that right to free speech needs to be balanced against a right to privacy and it would be even nicer if everyone exercised their rights responsibly (then we’d need no guidance).
In the event that WWD uncovered some scandal, he could do us all a great service by exposing it. But to do that via an anonymous blog would be ill-advised. He’d be best to seek the support of his trade union (who’d defend him against disciplinary action) first and to have credibility he’d need to reveal his identity.
Indeed there is nothing in the guidance WWD has shared with us to stop him blogging. He’s guilty, if not of lying, than of gross exaggeration. As the saying goes; never trust a copper (if he is a copper).
Stephen Newton / March 6th, 2006, 7:41 am / #
Teach people how to think, and how to think logically and rationally and anyone can say what they like, when they like.
If it’s good information, it will stand. If it’s not, it won’t. Simple. A free market in free speech.
Those who seek to restrict free speech are a threat to the essence of humanity.
Anonymous / March 7th, 2006, 2:20 pm / #
Teaching people how to think sounds very much like indoctrination – I certainly wouldn’t want an anonymous blogger (or blog commentator, like you) teaching me how to think.
A ‘free market in free speech’ is a nice sound bite, but nothing more. Like all rights, free speech comes with responsibilities. World Weary Detective hides behind a cloak of anonymity (as do you) and so obviously (and ironically) values his or her privacy. If someone were to expose World Weary Detective (or you), I’m sure s/he would object.
Yet you defend WWD’s right to breach others’ confidentiality.
WWD has blogged disparagingly on what s/he calls ‘Silly little Muslim boys’. If members of this gang wanted to give him a good kicking, it would be irresponsible to pass his name and address to them. We’re better off defining responsible behaviour, as the Met has attempted to do here, than attempting to teach people to think a certain way.
Some of the ‘essence of humanity’ (a propensity to violence, say) may not be very nice and is best repressed.
Stephen Newton / March 7th, 2006, 5:16 pm / #
how can WWD influence someone’s purchaseing behavior?
Anonymous / November 28th, 2007, 1:35 pm / #
Post a comment