I understood it to mean “if the employee blogs/uses social media to discuss a Williamson County topic, they should disclose they are an employee.” That seemed sensible to me, but I totally see your point if they just want disclosure no matter what the topic. That would seem too heavy handed to me also.

On the Dell stuff, I may not be using the right language. It’s not that I always “represent” my employer even when I’m away from the office. It’s more like my actions and behaviors reflect upon my employer. Honestly I don’t have the employee guidelines anymore since I don’t work at Dell. What they really meant to imply – in my own opinion – was that you should feel proud of working at Dell and should reflect that pride in all activities. Something like that. “Represent” is too strong a word and does get into the quandary you bring up. In fact, when I was a Dell employee and got the opportunity to present at some conferences and such, I always had to disclose that I was still Dell employee but that I did not speak on behalf of the company and that I would only share publicly-available info in my presentation. I usually specifically added, “Please don’t get me in trouble. Please don’t say ‘The Dell Guy’ just said something; please feel free to say ‘The Stwittergy Guy’ just said…” I had permission to represent my own company and disclose public information, but not to pass myself off as a “spokesperson” for Dell. Hope that helps clarify! =)

As with most news coverage of complex issues, the piece raises more questions than it answers. It is unclear about whether the rules apply only to county matters or all expression by employees. Requiring employees to follow confidentiality rules is of course essential, but if the bit about “any personal blog started by a county worker should identify that person” is really that broad then it’s extremely intrusive. Furthermore, such a requirement could have exactly the opposite effect of its intention – if an employee starts a blog on some sensitive political or sexual topic, do the authors of the policy really want the blog to turn up in Google searches for “Williamson County”?

As for the Dell policy that one is always representing one’s employer, I would find that intolerable as an employee and I would think that Dell would see it as opening up a huge new area of liability. What if an employee commits libel toward some third party on a matter unconnected to Dell? Could Dell then be sued because, according to its own policy, the employee was speaking for the company?

I don’t see the Williamson County policy itself online anywhere. If they publish it in full, I hope you’ll let us know.

Cheers,

Paul Reddam