I had a friend who worked with the guy and he behaved the exact same way at work. He asks for your point of view only because he wants to hear that you agree.

That’s a unique point which I have never thought of. Well, I guess when I speak about CEO blogs, it is more about their corporate rather than personal affairs, although that certainly doesn’t hurt too. If organisations view blogs as an important tool for stakeholder communication, then the CEO blog will be part of that.

For the use of pseudonyms, there are various schools of thought about it. Personally, while I do have a nick name, everybody knows who I am and my identity is not concealed.

If the purpose of the blog is to spread the corporate message, gather feedback and communicate with the public, then a website would do just as well, doesn’t it?

If bosses don’t blog about work, then it is alright for them use pseudonyms to mask their identities. So I think your count of zero for blogging bosses may not be very accurate.

Agree man…. I think that social media brings with it a greater democratisation of societal forces and influence. Because of an unwritten rule of thumb, bloggers are generally considered equals (although we would of course have heard of elite bloggers or A-list bloggers).

I firmly believe that regardless of whether you have a readership of 10, 100 or 10,000, you can still make an impact and a difference. And that is the greatest enabling factor of what blogging can do.

I think its a matter of managing expectations from the onset. While I am a firm advocate of the benefits of blogging, I also realise that not everything can be solved this way. It isn’t always the paragon of virtue in communications that many have lauded.

Before a CEO chooses to blog, he or she must be well trained and prepared to weather the storm, should it ever come to pass. I believe that not all PR counsel – whether internal or external – will result in the CEO speaking the stilted, corporate voice. There is a need for humanity in blogging conversations.

Having said that, we can’t expect CEOs to converse in the same manner as say a Doc Searls, Robert Scoble or Seth Godin. These are people who have been primed by the system for many years.

For moderating of comments, well there are schools of thought both ways. It depends on the maturity of the audience and how they choose to respond. If much of it is flaming or unreasonable, then moderation is necessary. If however, most of your commenters are genuinely interested in starting a conversation, then moderation may not be needed.

Hear ye hear ye! Unfortunately, sometimes the corporate culture of organisations may frown upon blogging bosses or employees. Ultimately, though the top dog should have more discretion, provided he or she can get the blessings of shareholders.

http://sayitbetter.typepad.com/say_it_better/2007/03/the_attention_e.html