what is the best approach to blog-work relations?

An article in the NYT today is just one of the latest to draw attention to problems bloggers have encountered at work. It contrasts two approaches to the problem. The first is Mark Jen's, who was fired from Google because of something he wrote on a personal blog. Jen has been hired by a new company, Plaxo, and helped draft their policy on employees' blogs and other forms of personal communication. The idea is that if everyone knows the rules, it can be safe to blog about work.

A representative of the Electronic Frontier Foundation is portrayed as more skeptical. This group, which has done lots of good work on how new technology affects our civil liberties, has also published a guide to safely blogging about work. The principle disagreement is about anonymity -- Jen and compnay say it is impossible and unadvisable, while EFF links to tools to protect your identity (tho they don't advocate breaking the law, of course).

I'm not so sure these two approaches are actually incompatible... it does seem wise for corporations to have clear policies about blogs, and if they're friendly, all the better. But the anonymous disgruntled employee is often useful and entertaining, and I would rather they not be fired (even if their employer has a right to do so).

The question is whether there is a real middle ground. It's clear that blogs are becoming part of normal speech more quickly than anyone anticipated. One would hope that the normal rules of a free society -- not just laws, but norms and etiquette and values -- would extend into this sphere. So what is the best way to help do with blogs what we would do with other forms of free speech -- venting about the boss, suggesting ways to improve our community, organizing for change -- while also recognizing that the open nature of the Internet exacerbates the consequences of what we write?