This is a really interesting post and you make excellent points. I have to say that I’ve often thought about how my blogging efforts can/might affect my chances of getting business from those I talk about. I’ve tried to play it safe by voicing my opinions, but in a fair and balanced manner. That means checking my facts before I post something.

The big flash-up about the Wal-Mart blogger relations campaign is another issue that has exposed Steve to some criticism re: his blogging. Jeremy Pepper and BL Ochman have really nailed him on this one. He’s in a tough position. We’ll all be watching this very closely to see how he navigates these tough waters.

Thanks for commenting. Thoughts, I have, answers – well, I’m not sure.

This was yet another bit of discourse for my students to consider. I cannot think of another instance where such a high profile blogger (in PR) moved from the agency that gave him his stepping stone into the highly visible C-suite of a major PR agency. So, this example is great for looking at where the line is drawn (or if it is drawn) on what is acceptable in C-suite blogging – or any employee blogging.

This could be an example of “moth to a flame” and it could be anyone, not just Steve Rubel. By “moth to a flame” I mean, “a moth’s attraction to an artificial light or to a fire could be related to orientation, and lead to disorientation…” Blogging in the C-suite is ‘still’ all too new. Maybe Rubel is just disoriented by the new light. My point? He may be finding his footing.

I do think it would be interesting to learn if Steve Rubel is rethinking his focus given his new status. It wouldn’t be too surprising, I imagine. Is two critiques a trend? I don’t know.

Does the timeframe in which they occurred matter? These latest posts are, in my opinion, a departure from his past blogging practices. Will a third mean a trend? We’ll see.

Rubel was already in the spotlight. Now it is brighter and, I imagine, a bit hotter. He finds himself being their WOM star and also – like all other employees – a guardian of the Edelman flame.

The question of timing of Rubel’s posts is certainly interesting. Coincidence, perhaps, or tactical. I can’t know unless Rubel answers.

I don’t see anything wrong with critical appraisals of the work of others – or competitors – if the tone is acceptable. In fact, I relish in it for the sake of learning, if for no other reason.

But, the tone of “all hat, no cattle” may not serve him, or his new employer, well. Where was his “hat and cattle” in comparison?

Doesn’t it seem at least a wee bit strange that these occurred in this timeframe? Perhaps Rubel feels freed from previous constraints (if there were any, or just perceived). Perhaps he feels emboldened by his newfound status. Perhaps he is trying to set his Edelman WOM practice apart from – and set it above – the others. I fail to see how slapping the competition does that effectively.

If the posts continue to come once a week, then I believe it is encumbent on Rubel to show his own “hat and cattle” to all of us. Well, actually I think it would be good if he opened up the whole farm with transparent lessons for us all.

I have written before that Steve Rubel is in the position to lead. Now, the question may be, “What kind of example will he set for the rest of us?”

However, I have been pretty close to the line a few times at calling out PR efforts tied to corporations that may one day want to hire me or my firm for work. Have I done myself and my firm a diservice by committing my personal thoughts to the blogosphere? I suppose we’ll see some day.

It’s a tough place to be. Lose your edge and your wallpaper and not worth reading. Get too edgy and your blog may actually hurt your career in the long run.

What are your thoughts?