Scoble writes about the "lessons he's learned" from the Niall Kennedy "imbloglio" in this recent piece: The Red Couch: Dave Sifry and Niall Kennedy in lesson on corporate blogging.

But, as much as I like Robert, and generally agree with his theories about corporate blogging, as well as the specific comments he makes in this post ("don't blog angry", etc.), he is off target here.

Kennedy was blogging personally: it was not a corporate blog. Kennedy's convoluted, after-the-fact reasoning that, in essence, there is no such thing as a personal blog if you hold down a paying job anywhere is simply wrong-headed. It may be the case that Kennedy has come to believe that, but it is a perspective that we should work hard to undermine, whenever it appears. Individual liberties, such as freedom of speech, should not be abridged by corporate policies or the disapproval of bosses, no matter what the content or criticism.

As I pointed out yesterday, there are five states (including California, where Kennedy works for Technorati) that specifically protect employees from being fired for legal outside activities. Of course, there is no indication that Kennedy was threatened with termination, but the point is that such laws exists to ensure that workers can enjoy free expression outside of work without fear of retaliation. And there is still an "outside of work": just because you are working 9 to 5, or even 100 hours a week in a startup, you are still a private citizen, and your employer cannot tell you to shut up.