8 ms·

Adam Orth leaving Microsoft proves personal Twitter accounts are dead

86 points by unfasten 13y ago

cykho 13y ago
This is sad, but true. You can't ask the public to draw a line between your personal and professional life. A good rule of thumb I was taught that if you wouldn't want to see it on the cover of the New York Times then don't write it!
- smacktoward 13y ago
  The problem here isn't the notion of personal Twitter accounts. It's Twitter itself. Twitter is designed to be encourage users to post things without thinking too hard about it. So they do, and sometimes that results in them saying stupid things that they would never have said if there had been even a tiny speed bump along the way to force them to think about it. Then they get in trouble if they're lucky, or lose their jobs/suffer social ostracism if they're not so lucky. This is nothing new, it's been happening for as long as Twitter has been around. I can remember it happening to political pundit Ezra Klein back in 2008: http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/is-ezra-klein-in-trouble-at-msnbc_b10038 http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/is-ezra-klein-in-troub... The problem is that Twitter's design is at odds with its actual nature. It's designed to feel breezy and conversational, but it's really about publishing, with all the permanence and exposure that implies. If you say something dumb in a conversation, it floats away on the wind unless someone else involved makes a concerted effort to tell people about it. If you say something dumb on Twitter, the ease of re-tweeting can make it blow up into a Big Thing in minutes. If people keep shooting themselves in the foot with significant real-world consequences while using your application, year after year, it seems reasonable that at some point people would start wondering whether it was the fault of the application instead of the users. But Twitter apparently has not reached that point yet. (If you want a more fleshed-out version of this argument, I wrote one here a couple of months ago: http://jasonlefkowitz.net/2013/02/i-kind-of-hate-twitter/ http://jasonlefkowitz.net/2013/02/i-kind-of-hate-twitter/)
  - TrevorJ 13y ago
    I don't buy this argument. Communicating verbally requires far less friction than posting to Twitter does, and yet professionals have managed to not say everything that crosses their mind when it isn't appropriate.
    - incision 13y ago
      I think the parent addressed this pretty clearly. "If you say something dumb in a conversation, it floats away on the wind unless someone else involved makes a concerted effort to tell people about it."
      - yuhong 13y ago
        That don't make Twitter not a good idea. The problems needs to be fixed properly.
    - ams6110 13y ago
      Or not..... comments about "legitimate rape" come to mind.
phren0logy 13y ago
His comments (note the plural) on Twitter suggest some poor decision making. Who is to say that this wasn't merely the straw that broke the camel's back?
- themstheones 13y ago
  Seems more like a case of the cement truck that broke the (possibly already strained) camel's back.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
TrevorJ 13y ago
The point this article seems to be missing is, it was his personal opinion about something he was also involved in professionally. He didn't say something unpopular about fly fishing, or jenga, he was stating his opinion about products and services that the public assumes he has a hand in designing. Not only that, but he was fairly abrasive in the way he chose to respond to backlash. Telling people to 'deal with it' just isn't a smart way to go about it when you are (rightly or wrongly) seen as speaking for a company.
- gm 13y ago
  Agreed. To me this is a story of lack of professional common sense. When this guy spoke, he spoke as someone with (implied) inside knowledge of both his employer and his industry. He should have either stressed he did not have inside knowledge and this was his personal opinion, or he should have said nothing. The problem with the first option is that he did have inside knowledge. Put another way, if he had said something that had affected stock price, he would probably face criminal charges. That's reason enough to shut the heck up, bite his lip, and let the internet be wrong. All of us with inside knowledge about our employers (specially if our employer is a public company) do that routinely.
  - yuhong 13y ago
    I hope that Reg FD will be fixed to consider Twitter as "fair disclosure".
  - shurcooL 13y ago
    > He should have either stressed he did not have inside knowledge and this was his personal opinion, or he should have said nothing. The problem with the first option is that he did have inside knowledge. All in under 140 characters?
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      > > He should have either stressed he did not have inside knowledge and this was his personal opinion, or he should have said nothing. The problem with the first option is that he did have inside knowledge. > All in under 140 characters? Well, the second options works well in under 140 characters (since it takes exactly 0 characters), and the first option (as noted in the grandparent post) has problems unrelated to character limits, so, yes, "all in under 140 characters."
minimaxir 13y ago
Also, remember what happened to Adria Richards and her explicit mentions of her employment at SendGrid. In both Orth's case and her's, they greatly damaged customer trust for their employer, which resulted in firings.
- corin_ 13y ago
  They're slightly similar cases but still pretty different. Adria Richards was a spokesperson for the company, that was her official role, Adam Orth was not. And despite that, Orth's comments hurt his employer because people took them as official, whereas Richards' hurt SendGrid not for that reason, but because people disagreed with her actions and therefore wanted her employer to take action against her - i.e. the backlash was to punish her, not because people directly blamed SendGrid.
TDL 13y ago
"You can’t separate your work from your rhetoric these days..." How exactly is this a new thing? We are free to say what we want, it does not mean we are free from the consequences of our statements.
- obviouslygreen 13y ago
  Having "rhetoric" in the first place puts you squarely in the public eye when you're in a high-profile position. If you can't keep that out of your public presence -- personal or professional -- then you're taking a risk, and not being aware of that just isn't an excuse at that point.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
zenogais 13y ago
This seems to be a problem with social media in general. It doesn't encourage us to be our authentic selves but instead forces us to constantly be only who are allowed to be under scrutiny from others (usually strangers) - not the same thing. The fear is that with so much more of our lives getting scrutinized, the project of becoming an individual might become less and less possible.
- ttrreeww 13y ago
  Just create an anonymous twitter account.
  - yuhong 13y ago
    Not the proper fix.
    - ttrreeww 13y ago
      If you show the world you are an a*, you should expect that to effect you in real life...
      - peejaybee 13y ago
        And heaven help you if you act like a dijkstra.
- saintx 13y ago
  The difficulty with being perfectly honest is that you might find out that you're honestly wrong. When technology amplifies our voices to the whole world, those private revelations become public spectacles.
pyre 13y ago
"Personal Twitter accounts are dead" is a bit over-the-top. * He didn't make inflammatory comments that were un-related to work. He was directly commenting on a rumoured feature of an upcoming product that he is over seeing. * He made no attempt to distinguish this as a personal Twitter account. On the contrary, he 'prominently' displayed his employer and position. * There's no reason that he couldn't have had a personal Twitter account without identifying information (i.e. pseudo-anonymous).
- hayksaakian 13y ago
  You seems surprised that the title was link bait, I assure you it was quite intentional.
seivan 13y ago
I am happy he left/got fired. The guy does not belong in gaming.
badclient 13y ago
Everything personal is dead once its negatively impacting your employer because of your poor judgement.
geon 13y ago
Companies really need do be less uptight and more grown up about the web. People share their opinions all the time, even gasp on the web. Get over it. I recall that MS employees can blog at microsofts domain, but there is a disclaimer that opinions expressed in blog posts not necessarily reflect the policies of MS. That is a more suitable way to handle things. Twitter isn't even connected to MS. Seriously.
- mirkules 13y ago
  Having employees be free of any consequences of what they say on the web (or otherwise) is a bad idea. Do you want your employees telling your customers or competitors what your next product feature is? Uncontrolled PR is an all around bad idea, and it's why many companies explicitly forbid saying anything about the company.
  - yuhong 13y ago
    Well, I have said before about secrecy that "neither extreme is a good idea": http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1185168&p=23409151&hilit=apple#p23409151 http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1185168...
  - geon 13y ago
    Obviously, keeping company secrests is important. That goes without saying. But that wasn't what happened, was it? An employee expressed his personal prefeerence for a technology that may, or may not be part of the netx gen consoles. (And everyone have been anticipatin this for years anyway.)
- commandar 13y ago
  There's a difference between expressing opinions and insulting customers. That's what got him in trouble.
  - geon 13y ago
    Hopefully what you say is true. It is not what the article described.
rquirk 13y ago
Somewhat amusingly, this troll on the debian-user mailing list predicted that Orth would be "fired". Let's see if he starts making commits to Tux Racer :-) https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/04/msg00265.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/04/msg00265.html
- nivla 13y ago
  >this troll on the debian-user mailing list predicted that Orth would be "fired". I don't follow the mailing list but are these "reddit-like" conversations common/tolerated on a mailing list? Off Topic: Is debian.org using a self signed SSL? It popped a warning on my browser.
gmisra 13y ago
IMO, the most interesting thing going on here is whether Microsoft will incorporate the backlash against his comments as meaningful product feedback. We don't know if the feature is being seriously considered or not, but if it ends up being included, that'll say a lot about how much MS values those opinions.
- danielweber 13y ago
  If video game companies have learned anything from the relation between "rage on the Internets" and "sales figures," it's that they are positively correlated.
hydralist 13y ago
Not if you aren't popular! Aha!
shmerl 13y ago
Somehow I doubt this will improve the situation with DRM on consoles. I.e. with him, or without him, MS will use DRM.
siamore 13y ago
Well after seeing this [0] and this post [1] from the other guy, I think that while he might have done nothing wrong, he did get a lot of attention, just the wrong kind [2]. [0]http://i.imgur.com/Na2Xkh0.png http://i.imgur.com/Na2Xkh0.png [1]https://twitter.com/manveerheir/status/320064992080691200 https://twitter.com/manveerheir/status/320064992080691200 [2]theVerge http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/5/4185938/adam-orth-speaks-on-required-internet-connection-for-durango-rumors http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/5/4185938/adam-orth-speaks-on..., Neowin etc, EDIT: removed wrong info about Sony's CEO responding to the original tweet, thanks @maximilianburke
- maximilianburke 13y ago
  > even Sony's CEO took a jab at his post. I'm pretty sure the Twitter account @KazHiraiCEO is a parody.
eykanal 13y ago
I'm missing why this is news to anyone. Almost any large company will have language like this in their ethics guidelines. Take this random company, for example [1]: > Never give the impression you are speaking on behalf of Biogen Idec in any personal communication, including blogs, social networking sites, chat rooms or bulletin boards. Others are similar [2][3][4] (search for "behalf of" in the pdfs). This google search will show you dozens of similar documents [5] This is completely normal. What Orth did was something that no employee should ever do, and particularly not someone in his fairly high position. [1]: http://www.biogenidec.com/Files/Filer/USA/pdfs/Request-Web-COBC.pdf http://www.biogenidec.com/Files/Filer/USA/pdfs/Request-Web-C... [2]: http://www.demasterblenders1753.com/Global/Attachments_Governance/Code%20of%20conduct.pdf http://www.demasterblenders1753.com/Global/Attachments_Gover... [3]: http://www.babcock.com/about/ethics/pdf/codeofconduct.pdf http://www.babcock.com/about/ethics/pdf/codeofconduct.pdf [4]: http://www.k2m.com/en_us/conduct http://www.k2m.com/en_us/conduct [5]: https://www.google.com/search?q=Unless+authorized%2C+do+not+give+the+impression+that+you+are+speaking+on+behalf+of https://www.google.com/search?q=Unless+authorized%2C+do+not+...
- blindhippo 13y ago
  It's not news to anyone except the writer on a site looking for link bait (and it worked). Didn't @dooce make this situation highly public? Twitter is no different then a blog... Orth was a moron and spoke for his employer - clearly he wasn't sanctioned to do so. There is no controversy, no outrage to be had.
  - markdown 13y ago
    > It's not news to anyone except the writer on a site looking for link bait (and it worked). Sounds like most of what currently passes for news on CNN and FOX.
- UnoriginalGuy 13y ago
  It would be hugely ironic if those ethics guidelines were private/confidential and you got into trouble for posting them on a public forum.
DanBC 13y ago
He's an adult, and an experienced professional, and had been working in the job for a while. Compare his situation with that of Paris Brown. She's 17, employed as a Youth Consultant. Tweets she had written before she got that job, when she was just 14 (maybe 15) were found, and thus there was a pile on calling for her to lose her job. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-22070354 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-22070354) Some people supported her. Others didn't. She left her job. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22085693 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22085693) Her tweets were really offensive; but kids are stupid and it's a shame we can't let children make mistakes (and then learn from them). I guess people are going to be more careful with their interview process from now on. EDIT: in general I tend to see anything that someone writes as their personal opinion, separate from their employer's position, unless it's a statement from the company on headed paper (or an official account); or unless the person has said "this is what the company says". It's weird to me to link someone's views to their company.
- mhurron 13y ago
  > in general I tend to see anything that someone writes as their personal opinion, separate from their employer's position, unless it's a statement from the company on headed paper (or an official account) This is actually important in this case. (BTW I do not work for Apple, never have). Lets say Apple has a new Mac Pro coming out. I tweet the following Mhurron: The new Mac Pro performs like shit. No one thinks anything of it really. However if the following happens: Mhurron(Product Development Apple): The new Mac Pro performs like shit. Apple has a problem (which is quickly going to become mine) and what I just said looks like more then just some crazy guys ramblings. This is what happened here. This guy clearly listed his position at Microsoft then proceeded to comment and argue with people over a product he had direct knowledge of. That looks like more then just arguing about personal preference. I too hate the idea that someone could take my opinions as official position of the company I work for, but at the same time I don't go out of my way to brand myself as working for that company either.
paddy_m 13y ago
I hope to have a colorful enough online profile to prevent myself from ever getting a boring, stifling job.
aaronbrethorst 13y ago
When I joined Microsoft in 2003[1], I was told very clearly to never write anything I wouldn't want to see published on the front page of the New York Times. I feel bad for Adam that he was canned, but he should not have been making news, especially in an inflammatory fashion, about an unannounced Microsoft product. [1] I should also mention that I left in 2007
- lake99 13y ago
  > I was told very clearly to never write anything I wouldn't want to see published on the front page of the New York Times. This is what I recommend to everyone. We can't trust Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. to keep our secrets for us. I mark everything "public", as a reminder to myself to carefully consider what I write there. I have anonymous ids to say things I can't be held legally accountable for having said.
  - aaronbrethorst 13y ago
    Incidentally, this is why every account I create has my full name. It's a good reminder to me to always think before I hit "reply"
    - illuminate 13y ago
      It's good to self-censor, but you can't always predict what others might be outraged by, take personally, or want to retaliate for. Plenty of internet persons aren't well off.
    - lake99 13y ago
      As a reminder, that did not work for someone, and that's why we have this story on HN.
  - mseebach 13y ago
    It's not limited to online services. It's "Don't write anything you don't want to see on the front page of the NYT", full stop. Your internal emails and documents can be subpoenaed or hacked or leaked. Also, your anonymous ID does not absolve you of legal responsibility, it just makes it a little more difficult to track you down.
joyeuse6701 13y ago
The lack of forgiveness that the internet has shown to individuals is frightening, (insert biblical persecution allegory here).
joshguthrie 13y ago
Welcome to 1984.
addlepate 13y ago
I recommend having accounts not linked with your real identity, where you can say what you actually think. It can be a pain because you have to be careful, but as noted philosopher Dexter Holland said, keep 'em separated.
leoh 13y ago
It's less nefarious than this. If most people read your twitter because you are a friend, then it's a personal account. If most people read your twitter because you work for some company, then your twitter account is not personal. That simple. Know your audience.
kuluktunkun 13y ago
I guess that's nothing, compared to what'd happen if he was against the ideas of own company.
nsxwolf 13y ago
I think in general we have a problem of deifying the concept of free speech (everyone loves the First Amendment), while at the same time we get our kicks censoring everyone whenever we get the chance (while gleefully pointing out the truth that the First Amendment restricts only the government). This is a real problem. I don't think we value free speech as much as we say we do. If we did, we'd tolerate a LOT more before pulling the censorship card. That said, canning Orth was a no-brainer. He set himself up as the ultimate anti-evangelist for the next Xbox console. He seriously undermined a product that hasn't been announced yet - this after the announced PS4 details had already positioned Sony as the "good guys".
- slantyyz 13y ago
  Also, aside from NDAs-- most people willingly consent to limiting their free speech as it relates to their employer when they sign their employment contract. The typical boilerplate employment contract usually includes easily overlooked clauses that cite publicly embarrassing or disparaging the employer and/or its partners, customers, etc. as cause for termination.
pacaro 13y ago
One part of the issue that I haven't seen addressed is the confusion caused by his job title. Much play is made out of "Creative Director" - all this means is that he was A Creative Director, but the story is spun that he was The Creative Director. I have no idea how many "Creative Directors" Microsoft has, or how many in the XBox division, but in general at MS "Director" in your job title usually just means that you are at a level above senior (otherwise known as principal) and (sometimes) are a manager of managers. So among other things, this is collateral damage caused by title inflation.
smackfu 13y ago
This case only proves that posting about work stuff on your personal Twitter account now makes it your alternate work Twitter account.
peterkelly 13y ago
Moral of the story: Don't be honest about your opinions on twitter. Just parrot whatever your current employer wants people to think all of their employees believe.
- pseudonym 13y ago
  Better yet, don't tie your social accounts to your real name unless you're going to be professional on them. Think of it like the difference between chilling on the beach with shorts and talking shit over beer vs. chilling a the beach in your $company uniform and name tag and talking shit over beer. If you're going to do the latter, you best hope that you know and trust all the people you're shitting with.
  - peterkelly 13y ago
    One of the many reasons why social media is overhyped, and private conversations are as valuable as they always have been :)

86 points by unfasten 13y ago

cykho 13y ago

This is sad, but true. You can't ask the public to draw a line between your personal and professional life. A good rule of thumb I was taught that if you wouldn't want to see it on the cover of the New York Times then don't write it!

smacktoward 13y ago
The problem here isn't the notion of personal Twitter accounts. It's Twitter itself. Twitter is designed to be encourage users to post things without thinking too hard about it. So they do, and sometimes that results in them saying stupid things that they would never have said if there had been even a tiny speed bump along the way to force them to think about it. Then they get in trouble if they're lucky, or lose their jobs/suffer social ostracism if they're not so lucky. This is nothing new, it's been happening for as long as Twitter has been around. I can remember it happening to political pundit Ezra Klein back in 2008: http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/is-ezra-klein-in-trouble-at-msnbc_b10038 http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/is-ezra-klein-in-troub... The problem is that Twitter's design is at odds with its actual nature. It's designed to feel breezy and conversational, but it's really about publishing, with all the permanence and exposure that implies. If you say something dumb in a conversation, it floats away on the wind unless someone else involved makes a concerted effort to tell people about it. If you say something dumb on Twitter, the ease of re-tweeting can make it blow up into a Big Thing in minutes. If people keep shooting themselves in the foot with significant real-world consequences while using your application, year after year, it seems reasonable that at some point people would start wondering whether it was the fault of the application instead of the users. But Twitter apparently has not reached that point yet. (If you want a more fleshed-out version of this argument, I wrote one here a couple of months ago: http://jasonlefkowitz.net/2013/02/i-kind-of-hate-twitter/ http://jasonlefkowitz.net/2013/02/i-kind-of-hate-twitter/)
- TrevorJ 13y ago
  I don't buy this argument. Communicating verbally requires far less friction than posting to Twitter does, and yet professionals have managed to not say everything that crosses their mind when it isn't appropriate.
  - incision 13y ago
    I think the parent addressed this pretty clearly. "If you say something dumb in a conversation, it floats away on the wind unless someone else involved makes a concerted effort to tell people about it."
    - yuhong 13y ago
      That don't make Twitter not a good idea. The problems needs to be fixed properly.
  - ams6110 13y ago
    Or not..... comments about "legitimate rape" come to mind.

phren0logy 13y ago

His comments (note the plural) on Twitter suggest some poor decision making. Who is to say that this wasn't merely the straw that broke the camel's back?

themstheones 13y ago
Seems more like a case of the cement truck that broke the (possibly already strained) camel's back.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

TrevorJ 13y ago

The point this article seems to be missing is, it was his personal opinion about something he was also involved in professionally. He didn't say something unpopular about fly fishing, or jenga, he was stating his opinion about products and services that the public assumes he has a hand in designing. Not only that, but he was fairly abrasive in the way he chose to respond to backlash. Telling people to 'deal with it' just isn't a smart way to go about it when you are (rightly or wrongly) seen as speaking for a company.

gm 13y ago
Agreed. To me this is a story of lack of professional common sense. When this guy spoke, he spoke as someone with (implied) inside knowledge of both his employer and his industry. He should have either stressed he did not have inside knowledge and this was his personal opinion, or he should have said nothing. The problem with the first option is that he did have inside knowledge. Put another way, if he had said something that had affected stock price, he would probably face criminal charges. That's reason enough to shut the heck up, bite his lip, and let the internet be wrong. All of us with inside knowledge about our employers (specially if our employer is a public company) do that routinely.
- yuhong 13y ago
  I hope that Reg FD will be fixed to consider Twitter as "fair disclosure".
- shurcooL 13y ago
  > He should have either stressed he did not have inside knowledge and this was his personal opinion, or he should have said nothing. The problem with the first option is that he did have inside knowledge. All in under 140 characters?
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > > He should have either stressed he did not have inside knowledge and this was his personal opinion, or he should have said nothing. The problem with the first option is that he did have inside knowledge. > All in under 140 characters? Well, the second options works well in under 140 characters (since it takes exactly 0 characters), and the first option (as noted in the grandparent post) has problems unrelated to character limits, so, yes, "all in under 140 characters."

minimaxir 13y ago

Also, remember what happened to Adria Richards and her explicit mentions of her employment at SendGrid. In both Orth's case and her's, they greatly damaged customer trust for their employer, which resulted in firings.

corin_ 13y ago
They're slightly similar cases but still pretty different. Adria Richards was a spokesperson for the company, that was her official role, Adam Orth was not. And despite that, Orth's comments hurt his employer because people took them as official, whereas Richards' hurt SendGrid not for that reason, but because people disagreed with her actions and therefore wanted her employer to take action against her - i.e. the backlash was to punish her, not because people directly blamed SendGrid.

TDL 13y ago

"You can’t separate your work from your rhetoric these days..." How exactly is this a new thing? We are free to say what we want, it does not mean we are free from the consequences of our statements.

obviouslygreen 13y ago
Having "rhetoric" in the first place puts you squarely in the public eye when you're in a high-profile position. If you can't keep that out of your public presence -- personal or professional -- then you're taking a risk, and not being aware of that just isn't an excuse at that point.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

zenogais 13y ago

This seems to be a problem with social media in general. It doesn't encourage us to be our authentic selves but instead forces us to constantly be only who are allowed to be under scrutiny from others (usually strangers) - not the same thing. The fear is that with so much more of our lives getting scrutinized, the project of becoming an individual might become less and less possible.

ttrreeww 13y ago
Just create an anonymous twitter account.
- yuhong 13y ago
  Not the proper fix.
  - ttrreeww 13y ago
    If you show the world you are an a*, you should expect that to effect you in real life...
    - peejaybee 13y ago
      And heaven help you if you act like a dijkstra.
saintx 13y ago
The difficulty with being perfectly honest is that you might find out that you're honestly wrong. When technology amplifies our voices to the whole world, those private revelations become public spectacles.

pyre 13y ago

"Personal Twitter accounts are dead" is a bit over-the-top. * He didn't make inflammatory comments that were un-related to work. He was directly commenting on a rumoured feature of an upcoming product that he is over seeing. * He made no attempt to distinguish this as a personal Twitter account. On the contrary, he 'prominently' displayed his employer and position. * There's no reason that he couldn't have had a personal Twitter account without identifying information (i.e. pseudo-anonymous).

hayksaakian 13y ago
You seems surprised that the title was link bait, I assure you it was quite intentional.

seivan 13y ago

I am happy he left/got fired. The guy does not belong in gaming.

badclient 13y ago

Everything personal is dead once its negatively impacting your employer because of your poor judgement.

geon 13y ago

Companies really need do be less uptight and more grown up about the web. People share their opinions all the time, even gasp on the web. Get over it. I recall that MS employees can blog at microsofts domain, but there is a disclaimer that opinions expressed in blog posts not necessarily reflect the policies of MS. That is a more suitable way to handle things. Twitter isn't even connected to MS. Seriously.

mirkules 13y ago
Having employees be free of any consequences of what they say on the web (or otherwise) is a bad idea. Do you want your employees telling your customers or competitors what your next product feature is? Uncontrolled PR is an all around bad idea, and it's why many companies explicitly forbid saying anything about the company.
- yuhong 13y ago
  Well, I have said before about secrecy that "neither extreme is a good idea": http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1185168&p=23409151&hilit=apple#p23409151 http://arstechnica.com/civis/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=1185168...
- geon 13y ago
  Obviously, keeping company secrests is important. That goes without saying. But that wasn't what happened, was it? An employee expressed his personal prefeerence for a technology that may, or may not be part of the netx gen consoles. (And everyone have been anticipatin this for years anyway.)
commandar 13y ago
There's a difference between expressing opinions and insulting customers. That's what got him in trouble.
- geon 13y ago
  Hopefully what you say is true. It is not what the article described.

rquirk 13y ago

Somewhat amusingly, this troll on the debian-user mailing list predicted that Orth would be "fired". Let's see if he starts making commits to Tux Racer :-) https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/04/msg00265.html https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/04/msg00265.html

nivla 13y ago
>this troll on the debian-user mailing list predicted that Orth would be "fired". I don't follow the mailing list but are these "reddit-like" conversations common/tolerated on a mailing list? Off Topic: Is debian.org using a self signed SSL? It popped a warning on my browser.

gmisra 13y ago

IMO, the most interesting thing going on here is whether Microsoft will incorporate the backlash against his comments as meaningful product feedback. We don't know if the feature is being seriously considered or not, but if it ends up being included, that'll say a lot about how much MS values those opinions.

danielweber 13y ago
If video game companies have learned anything from the relation between "rage on the Internets" and "sales figures," it's that they are positively correlated.

hydralist 13y ago

Not if you aren't popular! Aha!

shmerl 13y ago

Somehow I doubt this will improve the situation with DRM on consoles. I.e. with him, or without him, MS will use DRM.

siamore 13y ago

Well after seeing this [0] and this post [1] from the other guy, I think that while he might have done nothing wrong, he did get a lot of attention, just the wrong kind [2]. [0]http://i.imgur.com/Na2Xkh0.png http://i.imgur.com/Na2Xkh0.png [1]https://twitter.com/manveerheir/status/320064992080691200 https://twitter.com/manveerheir/status/320064992080691200 [2]theVerge http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/5/4185938/adam-orth-speaks-on-required-internet-connection-for-durango-rumors http://www.theverge.com/2013/4/5/4185938/adam-orth-speaks-on..., Neowin etc, EDIT: removed wrong info about Sony's CEO responding to the original tweet, thanks @maximilianburke

maximilianburke 13y ago
> even Sony's CEO took a jab at his post. I'm pretty sure the Twitter account @KazHiraiCEO is a parody.

eykanal 13y ago

I'm missing why this is news to anyone. Almost any large company will have language like this in their ethics guidelines. Take this random company, for example [1]: > Never give the impression you are speaking on behalf of Biogen Idec in any personal communication, including blogs, social networking sites, chat rooms or bulletin boards. Others are similar [2][3][4] (search for "behalf of" in the pdfs). This google search will show you dozens of similar documents [5] This is completely normal. What Orth did was something that no employee should ever do, and particularly not someone in his fairly high position. [1]: http://www.biogenidec.com/Files/Filer/USA/pdfs/Request-Web-COBC.pdf http://www.biogenidec.com/Files/Filer/USA/pdfs/Request-Web-C... [2]: http://www.demasterblenders1753.com/Global/Attachments_Governance/Code%20of%20conduct.pdf http://www.demasterblenders1753.com/Global/Attachments_Gover... [3]: http://www.babcock.com/about/ethics/pdf/codeofconduct.pdf http://www.babcock.com/about/ethics/pdf/codeofconduct.pdf [4]: http://www.k2m.com/en_us/conduct http://www.k2m.com/en_us/conduct [5]: https://www.google.com/search?q=Unless+authorized%2C+do+not+give+the+impression+that+you+are+speaking+on+behalf+of https://www.google.com/search?q=Unless+authorized%2C+do+not+...

blindhippo 13y ago
It's not news to anyone except the writer on a site looking for link bait (and it worked). Didn't @dooce make this situation highly public? Twitter is no different then a blog... Orth was a moron and spoke for his employer - clearly he wasn't sanctioned to do so. There is no controversy, no outrage to be had.
- markdown 13y ago
  > It's not news to anyone except the writer on a site looking for link bait (and it worked). Sounds like most of what currently passes for news on CNN and FOX.
UnoriginalGuy 13y ago
It would be hugely ironic if those ethics guidelines were private/confidential and you got into trouble for posting them on a public forum.

DanBC 13y ago

He's an adult, and an experienced professional, and had been working in the job for a while. Compare his situation with that of Paris Brown. She's 17, employed as a Youth Consultant. Tweets she had written before she got that job, when she was just 14 (maybe 15) were found, and thus there was a pile on calling for her to lose her job. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-22070354 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-22070354) Some people supported her. Others didn't. She left her job. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22085693 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-22085693) Her tweets were really offensive; but kids are stupid and it's a shame we can't let children make mistakes (and then learn from them). I guess people are going to be more careful with their interview process from now on. EDIT: in general I tend to see anything that someone writes as their personal opinion, separate from their employer's position, unless it's a statement from the company on headed paper (or an official account); or unless the person has said "this is what the company says". It's weird to me to link someone's views to their company.

mhurron 13y ago
> in general I tend to see anything that someone writes as their personal opinion, separate from their employer's position, unless it's a statement from the company on headed paper (or an official account) This is actually important in this case. (BTW I do not work for Apple, never have). Lets say Apple has a new Mac Pro coming out. I tweet the following Mhurron: The new Mac Pro performs like shit. No one thinks anything of it really. However if the following happens: Mhurron(Product Development Apple): The new Mac Pro performs like shit. Apple has a problem (which is quickly going to become mine) and what I just said looks like more then just some crazy guys ramblings. This is what happened here. This guy clearly listed his position at Microsoft then proceeded to comment and argue with people over a product he had direct knowledge of. That looks like more then just arguing about personal preference. I too hate the idea that someone could take my opinions as official position of the company I work for, but at the same time I don't go out of my way to brand myself as working for that company either.

paddy_m 13y ago

I hope to have a colorful enough online profile to prevent myself from ever getting a boring, stifling job.

aaronbrethorst 13y ago

When I joined Microsoft in 2003[1], I was told very clearly to never write anything I wouldn't want to see published on the front page of the New York Times. I feel bad for Adam that he was canned, but he should not have been making news, especially in an inflammatory fashion, about an unannounced Microsoft product. [1] I should also mention that I left in 2007

lake99 13y ago
> I was told very clearly to never write anything I wouldn't want to see published on the front page of the New York Times. This is what I recommend to everyone. We can't trust Twitter, Google+, Facebook, etc. to keep our secrets for us. I mark everything "public", as a reminder to myself to carefully consider what I write there. I have anonymous ids to say things I can't be held legally accountable for having said.
- aaronbrethorst 13y ago
  Incidentally, this is why every account I create has my full name. It's a good reminder to me to always think before I hit "reply"
  - illuminate 13y ago
    It's good to self-censor, but you can't always predict what others might be outraged by, take personally, or want to retaliate for. Plenty of internet persons aren't well off.
  - lake99 13y ago
    As a reminder, that did not work for someone, and that's why we have this story on HN.
- mseebach 13y ago
  It's not limited to online services. It's "Don't write anything you don't want to see on the front page of the NYT", full stop. Your internal emails and documents can be subpoenaed or hacked or leaked. Also, your anonymous ID does not absolve you of legal responsibility, it just makes it a little more difficult to track you down.

joyeuse6701 13y ago

The lack of forgiveness that the internet has shown to individuals is frightening, (insert biblical persecution allegory here).

joshguthrie 13y ago

Welcome to 1984.

addlepate 13y ago

I recommend having accounts not linked with your real identity, where you can say what you actually think. It can be a pain because you have to be careful, but as noted philosopher Dexter Holland said, keep 'em separated.

leoh 13y ago

It's less nefarious than this. If most people read your twitter because you are a friend, then it's a personal account. If most people read your twitter because you work for some company, then your twitter account is not personal. That simple. Know your audience.

kuluktunkun 13y ago

I guess that's nothing, compared to what'd happen if he was against the ideas of own company.

nsxwolf 13y ago

I think in general we have a problem of deifying the concept of free speech (everyone loves the First Amendment), while at the same time we get our kicks censoring everyone whenever we get the chance (while gleefully pointing out the truth that the First Amendment restricts only the government). This is a real problem. I don't think we value free speech as much as we say we do. If we did, we'd tolerate a LOT more before pulling the censorship card. That said, canning Orth was a no-brainer. He set himself up as the ultimate anti-evangelist for the next Xbox console. He seriously undermined a product that hasn't been announced yet - this after the announced PS4 details had already positioned Sony as the "good guys".

slantyyz 13y ago
Also, aside from NDAs-- most people willingly consent to limiting their free speech as it relates to their employer when they sign their employment contract. The typical boilerplate employment contract usually includes easily overlooked clauses that cite publicly embarrassing or disparaging the employer and/or its partners, customers, etc. as cause for termination.

pacaro 13y ago

One part of the issue that I haven't seen addressed is the confusion caused by his job title. Much play is made out of "Creative Director" - all this means is that he was A Creative Director, but the story is spun that he was The Creative Director. I have no idea how many "Creative Directors" Microsoft has, or how many in the XBox division, but in general at MS "Director" in your job title usually just means that you are at a level above senior (otherwise known as principal) and (sometimes) are a manager of managers. So among other things, this is collateral damage caused by title inflation.

smackfu 13y ago

This case only proves that posting about work stuff on your personal Twitter account now makes it your alternate work Twitter account.

peterkelly 13y ago

Moral of the story: Don't be honest about your opinions on twitter. Just parrot whatever your current employer wants people to think all of their employees believe.

pseudonym 13y ago
Better yet, don't tie your social accounts to your real name unless you're going to be professional on them. Think of it like the difference between chilling on the beach with shorts and talking shit over beer vs. chilling a the beach in your $company uniform and name tag and talking shit over beer. If you're going to do the latter, you best hope that you know and trust all the people you're shitting with.
- peterkelly 13y ago
  One of the many reasons why social media is overhyped, and private conversations are as valuable as they always have been :)