so here's my issue with blogs ...

on the one hand, the idea of an online journal is really kindda cool. whenever i get the urge to write something, i can. especially with the whole phone messaging option. i used to love keeping a diary, but i haven't been disciplined enough to sit and write for awhile. it's a shame because i enjoy writing and the manual process of putting ink to paper is very different from typing.

but my journal was always for my eyes only. blogging opens up your innermost thoughts to the world. is that always a good thing? when i'm ranting to get something out of my system it might be kindda cool that someone on the other side of the world can read it and relate to me. but do i want my best friend to read that post? my journal was always my place to put things that may be best left out of the public eye.

so i'm still figuring out the place for blogging in my life (convienently leaving my blog in an unadvertised location on my site ... at least for now) and i come across this article on boston.com: http://bostonworks.boston.com:80/globe/articles/070305_blogs.html about blogs and people who have been fired for the blogs. there's a very fine line of free speech here. on the one hand, we are (or at least should be by my reading of the constitution) free to speak what's on our minds and i don't think a company is going to fire the average person for bitching about the company over a couple of beers after work with friends. but when there's a public written record of this ... it's harder. it's one thing to verbally vent. another to present something in writing for the world to read - issues of slander come in to play. something written and published in the heat of the moment - an attempt to connect with other frustrated workers - is a different beast.

maybe blogs aren't a good thing ...

-s