2) it seems on a business related blog we tend to restrict ourselves to only business topics, not a bad idea. If it's focused on a topic you probably want to stay on topic as much as possible however the odd personal post I think is a good thing. The most interesting blogs are those that have personality, aren't afraid to show it and don't come across like a web site.

I have a business and personal blog…. on my personal blog I am a lot more personal and I am more informal. On my business blog people can find some personal stuff about me… I did the second biggest meme ever….The biggest , at 100 is on my personal blog.

@igorthetroll – On companies being human… the thing is a company is not a person, neither is a company brand so I think it's different. Companies are made up of groups of very different people and a mixture of different even opposing views who all agree to work for a common goal and mission. So I believe taking political positions can be tricky… they also are beholden to many stakeholders. I don't think CEO's can take publicly political stands….even if they hold strong personal views. They have to represent their stakeholders, including employees, customers, supplliers etc.

While I understand your dilemma due to the focus of your blog and your position at Doe-Andersen, I think there are certain times that our blogs should be used to express your deep feelings about topics (i.e. the election, Blog Action Day, etc). One or two posts which are off the normal track out of hundreds of other focused posts helps to show other sides of your personality.

Keep up the great work and thanks for sharing!

As you've noted, this is a particular business-y blog with a business-y purpose… and a very human voice (to which I'm proud to contribute).

Ultimately, your post urging folks to vote has an implicit, if not explicit, connection to social media, which is all about individuals finding, and using the social web to amplify, their voice.

I think the key difference is that for many corporate blogs, the purpose of the blog is to be an official, if more informal, channel for a publicly-held organization. In other words, while a blog allows more leeway in HOW the company says things, it doesn't grant total freedom in WHAT it can say.

Ultimately, if content is counter to the best interests and purpose of the blog, it doesn't make the editorial cut. And let's not pretend that all kinds of content fails to make the editorial cut in blogging, even personal blogging, for all sorts of reasons. But those reasons often boil down to “it's counter to the best interests of what I'm trying to do here.”

But I want to comment on your question, because it's so important: “It’s not wrong for someone to take a stand. Why is it wrong for a company to do so?”

No, Iit isn't “wrong” for a company exec to take a stand. But when you do, it comes with consequences — consequences can hurt your business and, in turn, the employees who depend on it and the stockholders who invested in it.

Dan Cooper, CEO and founder of Cooper Arms, learned this lesson the hard way. He was driven from the top job of his own company because he dared support a candidate other than the one favored by the NRA. (Disclosure: I'm an NRA member and an Obama voter.)

Yes, Dan is entitled to his opinion, and I support him 1000%. But he was naive to think it wouldn't draw the ire of the gun nuts — many of whom are his regular customers and supporters. For the sake of the company, Dan should have kept his presidential preference to himself. Free speech isn't free. Remember that.

A link to the story: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/outposts/2008/1...