Hacker News Reader

Comment by basseq | Hacker News Reader

> What does "titular" mean here?

Simply those employees referenced in the title of this post.

> They were making comments to the press while being Amazon employees something Amazon was in breach of company policy.

Well, and identifying themselves as such. That second part is key. It's not just, "I think XYZ about climate change." It's, "I, bjorne, an Amazon employee, think XYZ about climate change."

> So the policy requires people to not disclose that they work for Amazon while talking in a public forum. That's insane.

Why is that insane? It happens all the time. I don't feel the need to trumpet my employment status when talking about things that are entirely unrelated to my work there.

View on HN

Because it is detrimental to free speech. For example, if you in your spare time wants to get elected to a public office, you need to reveal your employment status. E.g "John Doe, systems engineer at Blah Company, vote for me as your Sanitation Commissioner." Maybe you're speaking at a rally or even a tech event: Our next speaker is John Doe, systems engineer at Blah Company, he will talk about ..."

These activities have nothing to do with work, so Amazon has no moral right to try to control them.

Do you think it is good that Amazon employees are afraid of speaking to the press?

OK, there's lots of gray area here:

1. I suspect you'd have "protection" to use your title as a credential in a relevant professional forum.

2. Most companies also have policies on running for public office, usually because of legal oversight to public procurement or policymaking.

3. Neither of your examples are explicitly "to the media", which is being discussed here.

4. Most companies are thrilled to help you advance your cause and theirs in things like running for public office or industry leadership, and will give you great resources like media training.

5. Straw-men: I bet the company would care if you were running on a policy platform of reducing sanitation in minority neighborhoods, or speaking at a KKK rally.

If these activities have nothing to do with work, then why are you bringing work into it? And if you're bringing work into it, then it doesn't strike me as unreasonable to tell your company about it.

It's not about "being afraid to talk to the press"... that's my point.

1. Citation needed.

2. Citation needed.

3. What is being discussed is "talking in a public forum." See the quote from the article: "The new policy requires staff members to seek permission from Amazon prior to talking in a public forum while identified as an employee.

4. Citation needed.

5. Indeed, you've brought forward a straw man.

> If these activities have nothing to do with work, then why are you bringing work into it?

That is none of your business! E.g don't shift the blame unto the victim. Neither Amazon nor any other company has any moral right to tell someone that they can't disclose that they work there while talking in a public forum.

I guess your point is that Maren Costa is lying when she claims the warning she got from HR for speaking to the Press frightened her?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com