I was recently asked to do an article on my past achievements in my profession.

34 Comments

1. AnonymousFebruary 25,2023 at 3:17PM UTC

   While I empathize with your situation, the problem as I see it is you asked the company what to do and then didn’t do it. From the company perspective, you chose not to follow a directive, which is what actually happened. You didn’t like what they said . You claim to be innocent but when you were asked about your current role, rather than indicating you didn’t want that included, you said nothing. You should have been clear that your current role was off the table. It’s possible the writer thought you missed it.

   My advice is a mea culpa.

2. AnonymousFebruary 25,2023 at 3:56PM UTC

   Your company’s reaction isn’t an attack on this article that highlights your accomplishments, but rather their response to a policy violation. They unfortunately don’t care that the article’s writer published without the opportunity to review. All they see if that you spoke to them about the article and then executed on none of their directives.

   I agree with the other poster. Mea culpa is the way to go. Accept responsibility, apologize profusely and hope you don’t lose your job. I’m sorry you’re in this position.

3. AnonymousFebruary 25,2023 at 6:58PM UTC

   Most companies tightly manage their IP - intellectual property, and the reputation and brand that they have built. You definitely should have followed the directive told to make sure you did not cross any lines within. I would consult and employment attorney with your company handbook and ethics statement and social media rules in hand and see what they think when they review all the facts. Additionally, I would speak to the person who published this and let them know that you were not fully approved and that you need them to write a letter to your manager and cc the company attorney to the effect that they published it without the final. Accept that you did play a part in it and be sure that you also write an apology note that can be put in your personnel file. Save a copy for yourself as well. As for Linkedin, it is owned by Microsoft and all of the information that is out on the web about you and on other social media platforms is in the public domain and not only for those on LI but anyone who puts your name into a search engine and adds the words linkedin after your name, you will show up and unless you hide or block you are not going to be able to remove what is out there about you. I'm sorry this happened to you especially since it is about great work that you did. One last question though, in re-reading your post you mention past accomplishments, if you did not mention your current company in the information you shared with the writer you could go above their head to their publisher and ask them for a letter for your employer too. They might be also willing to redact or add a correction so that you are not being injured by something their staff member overstepped.

4. Gayle S GorvettFebruary 27,2023 at 1:51PM UTC

   First, I would advise that you and your Company reach out to the writer and the publication to request a right of reply. This writer never gave you a final copy to approve. Regardless of whether you had gotten the approval of your employer, you could not have made the proper edits or corrections to the article.Second, the fact that you have a LinkedIn profile does not make any aspect of your life open to publication in an article. In fact, if a writer published anything that you posted in your LinkedIn profile word for word without your permission that could be a potential copyright violation. Regarding the company's IP, your life and work experience are not IP. It is pretty unlikely that you said anything to implicate IP in a discussion about your career. Talk to the company about the lack of transparency on the part of the reporter and see how you can make things right for both of you.

5. AnonymousFebruary 26,2023 at 12:23AM UTC

   I’m sympathetic, but you should have followed the company’s instructions.
   You didn’t and now your company is understandably unhappy.

   Even though the article is flattering and doesn’t discuss your current role, it does mention your current title, which does give your employer justification for applying its policy. In addition, your company can’t overlook this incident because it could be construed as permission for other employees to disregard the established review policy.

   About all you can do now is to offer your company the information that the article was published on the basis of an introductory interview and without your consent, and that you are unhappy that this occurred. I agree with the advice of others that an apology is in order.

   For the future: never talk to a publication without following your company’s requirements and setting ground rules in advance.

6. AnonymousFebruary 26,2023 at 4:08PM UTC

   I think being transparent was the best way to go. However, you never got a proof from the writer. How could you followed policy if a proof was never provided? This is a catch 22 situation because this person wrote about your past experiences. The information they put in the article was pulled from LinkedIn. By posting employment experiences on LinkedIn, its public information. How can a company hold a person accountable for someone pulling info from LinkedIn and using it with your name? If you did not sign or email any disclosure info, this actually should put the writer at risk if the company or you should choose to take action. Very poor that the writer did not do due diligence

7. AnonymousFebruary 26,2023 at 4:21PM UTC

   I disagree with the other posters. If they have read the post, this person did follow direction from her company. You can't go to legal without a proof to approve! Then she decided she was not going to follow through. Did you miss this? She was not given the choice by the writer and the writer did not do this person any favors by not following to get approval to publish. It was her story to share, not the writers and now this person may get in trouble because a writer needed a story. My apologies to you. It's a shame we all must do things anonymously because we are too afraid of anyone knowing who we are for fear of retaliation and I am just as guilty as the rest of you. What a wonderful life create when we create when we live and manage by fear..... NOT

8. Paula Manczuk-HannayFebruary 26,2023 at 7:36PM UTC

   I don’t mind commenting with my name. I can see your perspective to a point. I am stuck in the part where she didn’t respond when the writer asked about her current employer. She should have been clear on that and perhaps this could have been avoided.

9. G C HesseFebruary 27,2023 at 1:41PM UTC

   I agree.

   This is why you don't post your life on Social Media like LinkedIn.

10. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 1:58PM UTC

    You can't decide AFTER an interview that you don't want to participate. You've already participated. And as others have noted, many publications prohibit journalists from providing proofs prior to publication. If you need a proof for legal, make sure you mention that FIRST. When they say, "I can't do that," you can decide how to proceed from there.

11. Nadine BonnerFebruary 28,2023 at 5:18AM UTC

    I believe you are missing the point. She did not follow the company policy. She said she would supply a proof of the article but she failed to ask the writer to supply one. She does not say that she asked to see the proof and the writer didn’t supply it. It looks as if she didn’t ask and assumed she would get one. This is on her. I doubt the publication involved here is the New York Times. An industry pub would have supplied a proof had she asked. Generally the corporate approval process is drawn out and cumbersome so if she didn’t ask to see the article, the writer wouldn’t send it. All this LinkedIn business is beside the point. She told her company she would follow a process and she failed to follow through. That is the only issue here and she is trying to evade taking responsibility.

12. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 1:18PM UTC

    This all could have been avoided had you been honest with the writer and told them up front that you would only participate if you had final approval on the piece and that your company needed to run it past legal before publication. You let your ego get in the way. It seems clear to me that you didn’t like the restrictions put on you by your company and tried to skirt them. Now you want an “oopsie”. Sorry but your company is right and you’re wrong. Apologize, take the disciplinary action, learn from this and move on.

13. G C HesseFebruary 27,2023 at 1:39PM UTC

    Why it would it matter to this company...unless they are hiding something.

    If the company is DOE or DOD related I truly don't see the problem. She would have signed a nondisclosure to begin with.

    If the writer/publisher did this against her wishes, then contact your own lawyer and proceed with lawsuits against the Company and Writer/Publisher.

14. Kelley LambFebruary 27,2023 at 3:15PM UTC

    This article was not about the company. It was about the person. We give our employer too much power if we think we can't do an interview about our achievements without their permission. If she does not mention the company in her interview then she has done nothing wrong. It's not all about the corporate brand ! Not for an individual being recognized . The corporations who make money off the backs of their employees cannot have a say in everything they do! Come on people! Stop being such robots!

15. Heather ScofieldFebruary 27,2023 at 1:51PM UTC

    If this article was written by a journalist then getting the article proof was likely never even an option. Most journalists and their publications do not allow that. Though sometimes a newer journalist might agree initially, thinking it's okay (especially for a puff piece) then later be told by an editor it is not. It is also common for companies to be weird about this stuff. Safest option is to never speak to a journalist or publication without your employer's permission.

16. KellyFebruary 27,2023 at 2:00PM UTC

    I don't usually comment on these. However I want to comment on the social media aspect of your kerfuffle. Your LinkedIn profile is your brand, it's part of your digital life think intellectual property. For someone to use it without your consent is a breach of privacy. If you didn't communicate that it was ok to use this information the writer and their publisher are Liable. Now one step further by posting your current position and company in your linked in profile you become a part of the companies brand and a reflection on them. So from their point of view running an article by legal is a check box to make sure the story won't negatively impact their brand.

    All our posts and comments are opinions for you to read or ignore as you will but the Learning form this should be that communication is key as that seems to be the root cause of this whole situation. I wish you the best of luck!

17. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 3:23PM UTC

    You do not actually have an expectation of privacy when you post something publicly on social media. It is essentially public domain. When you voluntarily post something on the internet, you are essentially waiving liability.

    So, the writer and publisher are not liable.

    Basically, once you voluntarily post it, it is out there.

    See: https://catalyst.independent.org/2022/11/07/privacy-social-media-paradox/

18. Lori CasoFebruary 27,2023 at 2:00PM UTC

    If I’m reading this correctly- you so far have NOT received disciplinary action. Go to your manager ASAP and explain that the writer jumped the gun. ( Don’t let them find out from another source.)

    In the future be very wary of reporters/journalists/writers- trust me as a spokesperson- you have very little control of the final product.

    In a month this will be “old news” please don’t let it rent room in your head!

19. Afo Ogbeyalu KaluFebruary 27,2023 at 2:03PM UTC

    Send an email and a certified letter to the journalist and publication identifying your expectations regarding the project, the agreements you had with the journalist, how the actions of the publication were contrary to your discussions with the writer, and the adverse impact the article has had on you. Regrettably, the publication may to little or nothing to remedy this situation, but at least you'd have documentation that you acted in good faith, and could use to counter the disciplinary action in your employment file.

20. Nadine BonnerFebruary 27,2023 at 2:05PM UTC

    There are a lot of missing facts here. I have been a reporter for many years. When I was in the newspaper business and someone I interviewed asked for approval, I would explain that we did not let subjects pre-approve articles. If they persisted, I would decline to write the article or just leave them out . When I moved into editing trade publications, on the other hand, I always had the articles approved because we were part of the industry and not independent publications. The OP in this case does not appear to have asked the writer for approval upfront, which would have clarified the matter. Instead she assumed she would get a proof that she could share with her company as requested. In my opinion, she created this mess herself and needs to apologise, take her medicine and move forward, if the company will let her.

21. Leo FrenchFebruary 27,2023 at 2:47PM UTC

    I have noticed a number of people rarely ask another party what they think about this or that and just simply do as they choose. It's gotten to the point where I'm thinking every person needs to have a lawyer next to them whenever they speak to anyone.

22. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 2:48PM UTC

    I worked in media for many years.

    First of all, like others have said, reporters do not generally allow people they interview to get proofs especially proofs they could then hand off to a third party corporate brand. Corporations are interested in reputation management, not okaying the story you want to tell. Handing out proofs is essentially allowing the people IN the story to control what is said, which makes it a PR piece, not journalism.

    Second, adding something to the article that is posted publicly on LinkedIn is not an invasion of privacy. Once you have posted something online and on social media, you have lost control of that information and can expect other people to access it.

    Third, some companies can and do have policies that limit how people interact or even post their job titles on social media, particularly big box companies interested in reputation management. These same companies may allow you to post your job title and affiliation to them but also require you to follow rules about social media engagement (like not disparaging the company, etc.). It sometimes gets buried in onboarding but it may be there.

    Fourth, anytime you use your name and the company you work for you may be seen as a spokesperson for the company, even if it is not your intent. For example, Jill Bored, VP at Walmart says "Rising prices are not that bad" sounds like Jill is speaking on behalf of Walmart, even if she was just doing her shopping and a local reporter asked her personally as a mom. You can see why Walmart would not want that message out. As a result, many companies have strict media policies to prevent this from happening.

    In general, if your company told you you needed to speak to legal first, then don't talk to the reporter until it is cleared. You don't control the story otherwise. It doesn't matter if it is a 'nice' story or not. The company does not want stories out there THEY don't control.

    And if I haven't stressed it enough, DON'T post stuff on social media that can make your employer look bad. People have 100% been fired for posts and companies hate cleaning up that mess.

23. Nick KossovanFebruary 27,2023 at 2:49PM UTC

    I write a syndicated column ("The Art of Finding Work") and freelance, thus I have seen this scenario several times.

    From an ethics point-of-view the writer didn't do anything wrong. What you post on social media platforms is public domain and therefore fair game. The writer was under no obligation to inform you ahead of publication they would be using information form your LinkedIn profile, since it is piublically avaialable.

    However, it is my practice to have my subject first read the article before handing it over to my editor. This is something I do, but I know most journalist do not do this and are under no obligation to do so.

    Use this as a learning lesson regarding your digital footprint (What you post is public domain and can be freely used by anyone.) and when dealing with writers (Ask to see the article before it goes to their editor.).

24. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 7:43PM UTC

    I think a part of journalistic integrity is verifying your sources. Especially for a PR piece, I never write anything about a company or individual without running it by them first for accuracy. What if her linkedin profile hadn't been updated yet to a new company? They shouldn't be blindly running off this information which may be outdated/inaccurate.

25. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 3:03PM UTC

    No good deed goes unpunished.

26. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 7:39PM UTC

    What's the good deed???

27. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 3:16PM UTC

    My company has very specific guidelines that we’re highlighted in my employee handbook and detailed on our employee intranet. The author has to be made aware of your company policies so they do not act out of turn.

    So the saying goes: What is right is not always legal and what is legal is not always right.

    Id suggest that you don’t look at this as though the situation robs you of your accomplishment. Its not all lost. Find out from legal if edits are required and detailed need to be redacted by the author. Then ask about sharing on all
    social media platforms.

28. Carol BaldwinFebruary 27,2023 at 3:19PM UTC

    I had this happen once but it was because my boss was jealous she wasn’t selected.

29. Jacqueline CutlerFebruary 27,2023 at 4:19PM UTC

    You say you were recently asked to do an article, so it was not you writing it, but someone else?

    If information is on LinkedIn, FaceBook or Twitter, it is fair game. This is easily accessible information. Journalists use it all the time. Honestly, no one needs permission to do an article.

    It's better when the journalist has cooperation from the source, depending on the type of story, which you said was "really nice." I'd be thankful for that.

    I am sorry if you are facing disciplinary action. But short of scrubbing the internet of all mentions of you, our info is out there and can be used.

30. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 7:41PM UTC

    There are companies here in Seattle where even working with professionals for accounting careers events they are very specific that I can't mention they are affiliated with a company. They can support the event to talk about their career choice, but can't be there as a representative of the company without further approval. Given your companies stance, you might need to be really transparent with writers about this process of recognizing you and that you have limitations. Yes, anyone can see the information online, but it my experience from these situations, it's not that uncommon.

31. AnonymousFebruary 27,2023 at 9:50PM UTC

    As someone who handled media relations for a large organization for more than ten years, I’m curious where your company’s Communications/PR office was in all this and whether there was a media policy in place. The OP’s company gave the directive to go through legal, but reading between the lines it sounds like that did not happen.

    Our policy was to refer any request by a journalist IMMEDIATELY to our media relations officer so that they could first determine if it was in our best interest for the person to participate in the interview. The interview request could then be vetted and the interviewee given parameters about what could be discussed and what was off the table. It also ensured that the right person was speaking on behalf of our organization. I typically set up the interview and attended as protection for both the employee and the company.

    It’s simply not realistic to think that a reporter will let you cherry pick what’s said in their story. Most are on such tight deadlines that they don’t have time for interviewees to review and nitpick. That’s not to say that we didn’t hold their feet to the fire if they made a factual error about us, but in the OP’s case that’s not an issue. This sounds more like someone ignored the policy (I often had employees who thought the media policy didn’t apply to them for one reason or another) and is getting heat for it. Yes, their past is their own to discuss, right up to the point that it impacts the current employer. We don’t know what the industry in question is, whether there are NDAs, etc. I hope for the OP’s sake it becomes simply a hard lesson learned and not a disciplinary action.

32. AnonymousFebruary 28,2023 at 8:05PM UTC

    So, I thought I'd chime in here.... Just read something similar to this and if someone takes your name and title from an internet source, as long as the information that is being presented is not about the company or it's products, it's neutral and legal to do. If the company should say otherwise, get a lawyer because they might be infringing on your first amendment rights. This person has a right to talk about themselves without getting permission from there employer.

33. Nadine BonnerMarch 3,2023 at 8:46AM UTC

    Read the post. Really read it. The LinkedIn business is smoke and mirrors from the OP to evade responsibility for her failure to follow company policy. The OP told her HR dept she would present a copy of the article before it was published for their approval. She failed to ask the writer to provide such a proof so the writer didn't. The article was published without company approval and now she is facing disciplinary action. Not because of anything in the article but BECAUSE SHE DIDN'T FOLLOW HER COMPANY'S PROCEDURES. You can't go to HR, agree to follow a policy and then blithely ignore it.

34. AnonymousMarch 3,2023 at 8:49PM UTC

    For all who have commented, thank you for your thoughts and comments. They were very spirited. Everyone is entitled to their points of view, however, I guess without actually being in the situation, you truly cannot assess the entire scope of the situation and the reason for some of the spirited responses. Nonetheless, thank you to all. You have given me new perspective of how my coworkers and HR minds may assess my actions and I will be more alert to this going forward. I am the original poster and I wanted to give you updates on what has transpired in the past few weeks;

    • My Compliance and Legal department had no issues because they actually investigated the situation, (at my managers request,) and found I did not give permission to post the interview. The compliance/legal department only asked that going forward, as long as statements about our company are not made on my behalf, I have been asked to tell anyone I may talk to for any personal events, to place a disclaimer that my statements/views do not reflect the company and I am not a spokesperson for the company.
    • For those who mentioned I did not follow policy, actually, I did. I was asked to get a proof. One was not provided. The article was published even though they did not have all of the information needed.
    • We are a small company and we do not have a communications director who manages things like this. Most likely would have had a different outcome if so.

    Again, thank you. Was a rough few weeks with this looming over me, but, I'm glad there is some closure.