First, some advantages to corporate blogging. You can do it
internally to boost staff communication; or you can blog to the
outside world (the subject of this editorial), revealing the
personality of your people and complementing your brand with a
human voice. You can hold conversations with customers or potential
customers, find and encourage your brand evangelists and react
quickly to negative publicity.
Now the problems. The most obvious risk is defamation. You may
think your staff won’t write nasty things about other people –
after all, they'll fear being sacked. But what about corporate
rumours? Won’t a good blog be a little bit risky, a little bit
edgy, occasionally share some juicy gossip with the blogosphere?
That can be costly.
In 1997, a Norwich Union employee sent an internal email
suggesting that a rival, Western Provident Association, was being
investigated by the DTI and on the brink of insolvency. Western
Provident got wind of this and pointed out that the comments were
false and defamatory. Norwich Union ended up settling the case for
£450,000 – despite the email never even leaving the business. It
wasn't a blog but it shows the risk. Disclaimers cannot immunise a
company against the misguided observations of a member of
staff.
There are many other risks. Unhappy bloggers can generate
negative PR. Microsoft has the posterboy of corporate blogging,
Robert Scoble; but
some of his colleagues have reported low morale at Redmond
following the news that the consumer version of Vista, Microsoft's
replacement for Windows XP, will be delayed until 2007. Comments
like "Fire
the leadership now!" and "This
company is a mess on so many levels" are unlikely to
impress Bill Gates or other shareholders. A blogger could
unwittingly knock millions off a company's value by making a market
announcement in a blog exchange which, unburdened by corporate
lawyers, costs just $49.95 a year from TypePad. Or perhaps he just hints at
a takeover target and gets you fined for insider dealing. If you're
lucky, your shares won't be suspended.
Copyright and trade mark infringement are particularly easy.
That's what Ctrl+C and Ctrl+V are for. A blogger left The
Washington Post recently in the face of
plagiarism allegations (he denied it but resigned; his boss
said he'd have fired him anyway).
A joke can provoke a sexual or racial harassment claim. Reader
feedback can seal a contract without that vital small print. The
Advertising Standards Authority can chastise you for
misinformation. The Financial Services Authority can punish and
hurt you. Rivals can read your trade secrets and destroy you.
I'm scaremongering to some extent. There aren't many cases of
online defamation, despite the existence of more than 30 million
personal blogs. Defamatory comments might be unseen or ignored; or
if there is a complaint, removing the content and saying sorry
usually prevents a lawsuit.
Do remember that suits look more attractive than pyjamas to
prowling litigants, but do not panic. Businesses have always
trusted their staff to communicate with customers. Corporate
blogging is just another channel for communication. What matters is
that, if employers embrace it, they must do so with their eyes wide
open.
Good blogs bring out a personality. They need spontaneity and
oxygen, not censorship – which means keeping legal and marketing
departments at arm’s length. That is possible, despite the risks.
However, staff should still follow a blogging policy. This can be
standalone or part of a wider communications policy. Keep it simple
and make sure people know about it. Set out the rules: when they
can blog, what they can say, what they shouldn't say, what happens
if they break the rules. And don't allow everyone to blog. You need
to trust your blogger.
Choosing the right blogger is vital, but I don't just say that
because I'm a lawyer. I say it as someone who has been using the
internet as a shop window for an organisation for the last six
years. Sadly, most people can’t write compelling material; and the
people with the most interesting things to say are often the people
with the least time to say them. Blogs are easy to start and
difficult to maintain. So the biggest obstacle to corporate
blogging is not the law; it's finding good bloggers.
Should OUT-LAW have a blog?
I shared these comments at an excellent conference that took
place in London on Tuesday called Blogging4Business. With
almost 200 people in attendance, the £200-a-ticket event confirmed
that blogging is being taken seriously by a diverse range of
businesses. IBM has a staggering 3,000 bloggers. Less obvious
candidates, like PwC and
Wells
Fargo, are just getting started. Should we join in?
We've been running OUT-LAW for the last six years. It isn't a
blog but it has achieved many of the same things as a good
corporate blog: it raised our profile; it proved our expertise in
technology law where rivals only claimed to be experts; it
communicates in plain English, not legalese; it made the law firm
more approachable; it brought out some personality. Most
importantly, it brings in work for the firm.
But we recognise that OUT-LAW is now more than just a shop
window. We have thousands of loyal users and we'd love to engage
with them more than the current site allows. A blog might help. So
should we blog? If so, what do you want to hear? Please let us know.
By Struan
Robertson, Editor of OUT-LAW. These are the personal views of
the author and do not necessarily represent the views of Pinsent
Masons.
