Dear Microsoft

I won’t be there, either — hopefully we’ll see you at MIX.

I’m amazed that you now feel that “megabloggers” like Arrington are above criticism now, while arguing that line employees at an organization shouldn’t be allowed to express personal opinions. You’ve certainly turned “Naked Conversations” upside-down and joined the dark side, if you really believe that.

You know what it was like having people call MSFT and try to get you fired, and you know as well as I do that you crossed the line plenty of times and kept your job only because people stuck up for your right to speak your opinions. If you think that you stayed employed at MSFT by never screwing up, you’ve truly lost touch with your roots. I would expect more empathy for a fellow blogger from you, of all people.

And if you followed Dare’s tweets, you’d see that he called out Boomtown and Alley Insider for the same biased gloating — and defending Google and Yahoo! is hardly “MSFT attacking TechCrunch”.

I suspect that Mike Arrington was so flattered than someone would believe him relevant enough to impact stock market indices, that he wanted to draw attention to it. “Bill Gates Accuses TechCrunch of Swaying World Markets! I AM SHOCKED! PLEASE READ!”

Scobleizer, why are you injecting yourself into what should be a personal spat? I find it absurd that this whole thing is on the front page of TechCrunch when it is clearly something personal between Michael and Dare.

Dare’s blog is not an official company blog, and that is made clear. They are his opinions, just as yours are on this blog… correct? Or was Fast Company behind your letter to fellow democrats? Was Fast Company behind the post where you “attacked”/ critiqued all of the startups sites a while back? How about when you were at Microsoft and posted about the company backing certain political things in the state of Washington? No – they were your thoughts, on your blog.

Because Dare works for Microsoft, he is not allowed to have his own thoughts on his own blog without it being some company mandate or official line, or he should “face consequences”? I suppose his choice in music should also be considered, since it is posted at the bottom of his posts, and I doubt Microsoft would endorse it all. Point being, it is a personal blog with a personal opinion, just as you have had at your employers, where things are written that have opinions that may or may not go along with the company or those that are written about. Given you have written about how you would “die to protect free speech”, I find your involvment in this strange.

It is also rather amusing that his post was a so called “attack”. Given that TechCrunch purchased F*ckedCompany it is rather funny that this is now what would be considered an attack. In fact, I saw nothing that should be considered an attack. Compare the post in question to what Arrington wrote on Twitter – i.e. name calling etc.

Further, why is this even worthy of being on TechCrunch? TechCrunch is not some personal blog. It is supposedly a real business. For this to be on TechCrunch is like you posting this at Fast Company, or Microsoft issuing it as a press release or on something like Scott Guthrie’s blog which is deemed official communication. It is ridiculous and unprofessional. As an example, while I think the name calling on Twitter was absurd, Twitter is not a business site – it was personal posting, so totally fine, but to post it on a company site, why? Again, unprofessional. How does that fit with what people go to TechCrunch for? What’s next – Arrington posting about what he ate for dinner? Totally fine for a personal site, but it is supposed to be a business right? With other writers and with a set of topics it covers. The post almost makes it more F*ckedCompany like in some ways.

The main thing is, so a guy writes about TechCrunch covering things in a way deemed like F*ckedCompany, fine. How is that an attack? How is that any different then any of the millions of people talking about how the New York Times has a slant? Would it not be absurd to see an article about that

I also found it a bit low brow and suspect that Michael commented about Dare’s father. What did that have to do with anything? That is out of bounds.

Finally, as I said, I do not understand why you are getting involved, but you know what – it is your personal blog, and as stated above – more power to you, that is your right. Why not post this as a Fast Company video too? See, that would be absurd. However, if you have evidence that Microsoft has some company mandate, telling people to “attack” others from their personal blogs – that is news and you should produce it, rather than intimating and throwing out in your comments.

If I read you correctly, you’re calling on Microsoft to censor an employee’s personal blog. Is that really what you’re calling for?

Think of the chill over free expression that would cause over all bloggers at Microsoft – among other bloggers employed by others. Yes, blogging has its consequences, but is it up to an employer to be the police or the community as a whole to simply decide that a blogger is relevant, or irrelevant?

Or should we all be blogging anonymously? I am rather surprised at your position here as I would imagine that while you were at Microsoft, an attempt to censor you by Microsoft would not have sit well with you.

Interesting that my comment was removed, just as people are complaining about on TechCrunch. I guess you no longer “would die to protect free speech” as you posted once.

So disappointed in this post. I’m afraid to leave my actual comments on this as it could be taken out of context and used as an attack. I do however think this is just Robert cashing in on the TechCrunch vs Dare @ Microsoft saga.

Can we all maybe growup and move forward? Why is it there always needs to be conflict?

-
Scott Barnes
Microsoft.

I’d like to let everyone know that I just wasted 5 minutes of my life reading a post whose only purpose was to make me to fee sorry for Scoble and his pals. Um, I’d like my 5 minutes back please!

This is a good example of that makes “professional blogger” such a confusing misnomer to me.

Robert, your statements go against everything you used to stand for when it comes to empowering bloggers. You’ve become a prima-donna believing that you should be above criticism and that anyone who verbally attacks you should suffer consequences. That’s not the Robert Scoble I used to know.

http://live.sax.net/2008/10/scoble-goes-off-the-deep-end/

Mike: no, that’s not what I’m saying. You also misrepresented EVERYTHING I said when I worked at Microsoft. When your staff on the front counter of your store starts yelling at the customers, and especially the press who are bringing in customers, you should get told off. I got told off when I worked at Microsoft a few times for stuff I wrote.

Arguing with the press is stupid when you’re a corporate blogger and Dare is one of the top five bloggers representing Microsoft in the community. I would never have stood up for that kind of blogging at Microsoft and I would have been wrong to do that.

I know lots of executives who don’t like the press at Microsoft. Have you ever see them lash out as someone like Walt Mossberg? No. Tell me, why is that? Because it would be stupid.

Scott: why does there need to be a conflict? Well, you sure seem to be feeding conflict when you say I’m just doing this to take advantage of a situation. It seems to me that there could be grave consequences to me for giving my point of view.

TKH if it took you five minutes to read a few hundred words you must be a slow reader. Just hit “J” in Google Reader sometime. It’s a great keyboard command.

So let me get this right. It is ok for every blogger out there to trash MS on a daily basis and make a living from it, but MS can never fire back? And if they do, you take your marbles and go home. This sounds so high school.

Robert, can you share what you think the appropriate response should have been or be from Microsoft?

Fire Dare?
Publically call him out?
Privately scold him?
Ban blogging my Microsoft employees?
Understand that bloggers may have personal opinions and ignore it?
Other?

What kind of response would make you conclude that MSFT gets it, whatever it is?

Robert, can you share what you think the appropriate response should have been or be from Microsoft?

Fire Dare?
Publically call him out?
Privately scold him?
Ban blogging my Microsoft employees?
Understand that bloggers may have personal opinions and ignore it?
Other?

What kind of response would make you conclude that MSFT gets it, whatever it is?

I’m not going either! Harrumph!

I do not agree with two reasons that you gave :
Number of journalists and bloggers that will be there : Sure, there will be a lot, but you have your own opinion and we people like to read whats your perception. Always a first hand experience is good. It is fair to say, there wont be too much concrete and if that is the reason perfect.

Second one would be, you dont get good videos. Might be true, but we people are more interested in opinion, people you interview rather than the quality of video.

I completely agree with reasoning about feeling unwelcome and respect that.

Robert, I’ve read Walt Mossberg. I knew Walt Mossberg. (I wish) Walt Mossberg was my friend. Robert, you’re no Walt Mossberg.

On a more serious note:

Robert, if you are one of those very important bloggers that everyone should be careful not to offend, then you have taken yourself out of the conversation. As soon as you put yourself above the conversation, you are no longer in it.

So, okay, you’ve earned your status a member of the press, but you are no longer worthy of the title “blogger”.

Robert,

Feeding conflict or trying to stop conflict? as the way I see it you’re implications are reckless and given the tone of comments on this post, it appears your readers aren’t in agreement with your stance.

Michael Arrington had a bad day yesterday, he’s retracted some of the tone within his post to reflect it’s actually between Dare@Microsoft and TechCrunch, not TechCrunch and Microsoft. To me, this shows a not only courage but the right thing to do to and that’s worth mentioning.

Your post on the other hand, still stands and now you seem to be alone in your little quest here?

My point still stands, that there is no need to be negative all the time. It just fuels ignorance and it’s a lesson I’ve learnt the hardway (making the point that we’re all human).

Your move champ.

-
Scott Barnes
Microsoft.

Translation: No one spoon-fed me. Even my not going is big news, as I am all important, if I am not there, it doesn’t matter, time to royally mess up their party. I will latch onto some insider-backroom spat, including the overall worldwide economy in general, adding them on as an excuse.

Really, geeesh. Lower the ego. Go if want, don’t go if don’t, your reasons are your own. And shutupaboutit.

five minutes to read a few hundred words you must be a slow reader.

Some people like to focus on that thing called comprehension, which eventually becomes retention. I am a slow reader every day, on Arts and Letters.

Mike: I get attacked more than anyone in the business. Just read Valleywag. Most of what got me worked up is the defense that personal blogging doesn’t reflect at all on the company. It absolutely does for right or wrong.

Scott: I’m not doing this cause Mike told me to. I just am noticing a trend that you should discuss with your PR team and decide for yourself if that’s “smart blogging.” If you think it is, keep it up!

Robert,

I don’t see how you have the right to criticize but other’s don’t. Are you guys trying to be internet’s elitist’s?

- Praveen

I am sorry to say, but you have token a partisan stance on the situation. You make it seem like a corporate blogger standing up for something he believes in is a attack on follow bloggers. But really this reminds me of a republican. No matter how wrong they are they will still lie in your face, while never point to any facts. ie no link to what your talking about. As the year go by your sinking lower and lower. I mean at least pirillo to the plunge into the b***sh**. Dear Microsoft, what is this a Dear John letter, as if your were breaking up with someone. Have some integrity

Alijah: fair enough. But life isn’t fair when you are a blogger associated with a company. It’s more akin to working the front counter of a store.

But, I do see that I pushed this too far. I apologize. Go on with your lives. I’m still not going because of the other reasons. At the last PDC there were hundreds of press people. I’m sure you’ll hear all about it.

Robert: Yes, I agree that personal blogging can affect the company. I also think it’s fine to express opinions, even critical ones, in a professional manner.

The two phrases you wrote that really got me were “without consequences” and your reference to “never attack anyone who used ink by the barrel”.

The “without consequences” comment still puzzles me. What do you mean by that? How would you even know that there were no consequences?

And with the “ink by the barrel” comment you’re really putting yourself on a pedestal. I would argue that every single blogger or non-blogger, customer or anyone else deserves the same kind of respect that you do. If anything, it’s you guys who would be the first one who deserve criticism over anyone else.

I just notice a trend if you’re a blogger then you should not like what Microsoft does at all. ? what am I talking about when blogger s are so hell bent to suggest to stay with windows xp, never blinking a eye to the competition. And all the problems as if you didn’t notice them.