1.A compliment for thinking to go and check out GM's blogs -- wish I had thought to do it myself.

In this case, I agree that GM should disable the commenting function. Emotions are running high, and both sides are at a critical juncture in the negotiations. Sometimes discussions need to be behind closed doors. But I need to ask the question -- is a blog really a blog (or just a website) if readers can't engage in a conversation?

It will be interesting to see how and if GM's position evolves if there is a protracted strike -- especially if blogs by striking workers gain any currency.

2.This goes to my central contention about CEO and company blogs -- companies will use them in the good and happy times, but when there's a "bet the company" crisis that requires them to circle the wagons and post lawyers on the ramparts, they will go to radio silence, just as GM has done, just as Microsoft made Scoble do in the WMF metafile security vulnerability kerfuffle and the San Jose Mercury story on a delay of Windows Vista. Companies don't yet see blogs as a legitimate, ongoing communications channel. It's a "nice-ta" not a "gotta."

3.I disagree, Steve. Having been involved as a communicator in some labor issues, I know that some negotiations shouldn't take place in public. I'm not altogether sure what would have been served by inviting every blow-hard from both sides of the issue to snipe at each other from a blog that's supposed to be focused on the subject of cars. Note that the strike ended in two days, clearly the result of private, behind-the-scenes negotiations. How much longer would it have dragged on if it had turned into a pissing contest in the public eye?

Transparency does not mean everything a company does has to be done in public. That said, I do think there is a time in some labor issues where making your case publicly makes sense. GM never got even close to that point, though.

What GM did do, I like. I remember working in companies that were in the midst of acquisition or takeover talks where nobody said anything. Yes, I understand the "quiet period" rule, but for goodness' sake, can't a company say, "We can't say anything, and here's why"? That's what GM and Christopher Barger did with that one post, which is more than most organizations would. I thought it was an effective use of the blog and even that much probably required considerable strategic thinking.

4.And I also agree, Shel, that labor negotiations should take place privately (I did labor media relations at Conrail for many years...and it took years for us to get the management labor relations people to understand that the minute they briefed the Altoona congressman about layoffs at the locomotive shop, the union would know, and wouldn't it be better to tell them at the same time...)

I suppose GM did the best they could with the statement on FastLane. Although when it was first launched, they did a lot of work to position it as Bob Lutz' personal dialogue with car enthusiasts. Now, since he has more important vice-chair things to do, many of the posts seem to be by GM PR people pretty much cutting and pasting from their PR playbooks.

What I was trying to suggest is not that they should try to have a conversation about the negotiations on the blog, but that there are just some things that blogs are not going to be used for in a corporate environment.

So no matter how much bloggers and blog consultants argue for total transparency and authentic voice in blogs, the fact remains that in a circle-the-wagons crisis or sensitive situation, most companies will not permit unfiltered, unlawyered conversations from their executives to their constituencies.

The two Microsoft examples demonstrate how the heightened expectations of blog enthusiasts caused some degree of discomfort for Robert Scoble. Microsoft had a security vulnerability in the WMF clip art that comes with MS Office. Many security consultants were urging users to install a hotfix patch developed independently of Microsoft, while Microsoft was saying "a patch is coming in ten days, as soon as we finish testing it," but the experts said the security problem was so grave that people shouldn't wait.

Everyone who had gotten accustomed to turning to Scoble for the inside "skinny" was disappointed to find nothing in his blog but a link to the official MS statements.

And he got really testy with some bloggers who tweaked him about the San Jose Mercury's story that Vista might have to be rewritten from the ground up.

So it's not a terrible surprise that he moved to a different company where the blogging philosophy might be less restrictive (and the stock options less restrictive as well?)

As communicators, I think we need to make sure companies understand the risks inherent in promising unfettered, "Naked" conversations like people expect in blogs, and think very carefully about reputation risk they would incur by presenting the blog as a completely no-holds-barred dialogue if they later need to pull the plug for a while...

I know it's a contrarian viewpoint, but that's why you have comments enabled, right? <grin>