Michelle at Consuming Louisville says employees at “one of Louisville’s Fortune 100 health insurance companies that rhymes with “Shumana”” can’t access her site at work because it’s a “web log.”
Can anyone at Shumana read this site? Is this site blocked by anyone else’s workplace?
Now, an employer seeking to keep employees focused by cracking down on web browsing makes sense. Is there a study about web browsing and productivity?
What do you think of this apparent development? On the surface, it seems harmless for a company to block distracting websites, but maybe someone reading this has evidence to the contrary.
I have e-mailed the company to ask about this and I’ll report back soon.
Advertisement
11 comments
December 28, 2009 at 11:45 am
David Harpe
Michelle should be able to check her web server logs to see if this is true.
Regardless, whatever happened to asking for an official statement before reporting innuendo like this? I’m sure you have the phone number for the PR person at the aforementioned company. Give them a call and find out what is up. It could be an official policy – it could also be a technical issue.
Either way, do it right. It’s not like it’s “breaking news” or anything.
December 28, 2009 at 8:24 pm
gabebullard
@David
Thank you for your comment. I have e-mailed the company to ask about this. I sent an e-mail this morning, but I was using an outdated e-mail address. A new request has been sent.
Now, about posting this without a statement from the company. I think it’s clear from the context of the post that this is one person’s–Michelle’s–situation. I also make it clear that a move like this is completely in-line with other policies at other companies, and I’m not being critical. Like John says in a reply to your comment, it’s just to foster discussion.
If this had been a hard news post or a radio story, we would have waited on official comment from Humana. I thought about whether I should post this before I put it up. You say it’s not breaking news, and that’s true. That was one of my reasons for posting it. It’s an interesting, but overall run-of-the-mill situation. No one is likely to be harmed by the story (had I said, “THIS COMPANY CENSORS NEWS” that would be different, and I obviously wouldn’t make such a statement without investigating several sides of the issue) and I think it’s an interesting topic to discuss. I’ve worked at places where certain websites were blocked, and I completely understand why they were.
I’m not reporting rumors, I’m reporting Michelle’s comment and making it known that it’s just her comment. Had she made an unfounded statement against the company, I wouldn’t have quoted her.
Thank you for your comment, though. I appreciate having watchdogs out there. Please keep it up.
December 28, 2009 at 4:47 pm
John
Yes, I’m sure that the PR reps at “Shumana” would have taken the time to investigate the process by which their IT departments find, classify and assign the applicability of any given web site’s usefulness to the employees. There are probably multiple IT groups involved, spread out in various parts of the country. But the PR folks will have no doubt dropped everything, including all those pesky questions about health care reform, to comment on Consuming Louisville site. Shame on this drive-by journalism.
And how dare they write a post that was so clearly designed to promote conversation, for that matter? I, for one, refuse to be duped in such an obvious manner
December 29, 2009 at 9:11 am
MojoRick
Hey, this is not news. Humana employees have always been blocked from accessing Mojo. This is true of other companies in town as well. I have readers who tell me all the time — “I have to wait until I get home to check your site.”
Rather than see it is a badge of honor, we’d like to see the companies take another look at their policy and give their employees the freedom to read what they find relevant and interesting.
That’s just the way it is.
Rick Redding
LouisvilleMojo
December 29, 2009 at 10:10 am
gabebullard
Why should a company let their employees read interesting content during work time? I’m not in favor of authoritarian workplaces, but have you ever worked in an office that would let you read a book at your desk? I’m sure it depends on the job.
December 29, 2009 at 11:37 am
Jeff
I agree that companies have every right (and in some cases an obligation) to filter their employees’ Internet browsing while at work. As they put it on “The Office” last night, “time stealing” is frowned upon by the boss types.
On the flip side, no matter what a company does, there is always going to be a certain amount of time wasted by employees each day and I think it can become a morale issue if a company is too restrictive. Many companies eventually lose employees due to a negative workplace atmosphere.
As an IT professional, I am sure that, like most companies, “Shumana” is relying on automated technology to filter most of their employees’ Internet traffic; they likely didn’t single Consuming Louisville out, it just got caught up in the black list.
Lastly, I think that it is clear from the original post that the topic is more about companies in general filtering Internet traffic and not a criticism of “Shumana” and that the statements reported were appropriately sourced and vetted.
December 29, 2009 at 12:30 pm
David Harpe
Hey Gabe,
Thanks for your reply. Sorry if it seemed a little terse. I have no connections to the company in question. I think it is a fascinating story that you could do a lot with from a number of angles. What are other local company policies involving web site blocking? What do they do about employees with smart phones? Are there specific things that put a site on the “black list”? Is there an appeal process a site operator can go through to have the block removed? In the current always-connected world, it’s a very interesting issue. Would be great to see an in-depth treatment.
Dave
December 29, 2009 at 1:20 pm
gabebullard
Thanks. Sorry if I sounded harsh as well. I’ll definitely keep looking into it, but I’m not sure it’s anything more than a common corporate policy. I’ve contacted a few office workers in other businesses and fields to see what they’re networks are like.
Plus, there are more pressing stories to investigate right now.
December 30, 2009 at 8:43 am
Michael Calvano
Have the Shumana employee try to go another site with a comments section. Most likely they are all blocked. That company, like all large companies, use web filtering services that automatically categorize and block websites.
Besides, so what if they are? The employee is surfing the web on company time using the Shumana network and computer. Shumana has every right to control the content.
December 30, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Elle Waters
Disclosure: I work for this particular Fortune 100 company, I am a friend of Michelle’s, and I used to work for Metromojo, and I consider them all good things. I am speaking as much about all restrictive Internet policies at companies as much as this one.
Surfing the web isn’t always for play. As a web tech working on consumer facing websites, there are many times I try to research a technical problem I’m facing, to gather wisdom from more experienced folks out there, and I can’t access content that might solve that issue with Ajax or modal windows or accessibility that we’re working through. One of the benefits of an open web environment at work means that you have more wisdom than just the sum of your own employee base to learn from and improve. We don’t have that ability.
Additionally, if a company is interested at all in engaging with consumers to improve its products, social media needs to be considered as a part of that medium. We’re no longer in a position to ignore what people say or want, nor should we be, but to create a genuinely helpful campaign that is more than fluff, a company needs to listen to its consumers and respond to questions and needs. We don’t have that ability.
And finally, PR starts at home, here in Louisville. Being a good corporate citizen in our community is as much on the street as it is on the web. LouisvilleMojo and ConsumingLouisville are two ways to get to know what’s really going on with residents, what matters to them. We don’t have that ability.
There are solutions already in place to limit unnecessary or excessive use of surfing the web during company hours, and they’re mainly about better management. If someone wants to goof off, they will with their cell phone. What’s at risk is denying employees the ability to engage with those outside the walls and find innovative ways to improve the company and what it offers.
(sent from my home computer)
December 31, 2009 at 12:04 pm
An Update On Blocked Blogs « The Edit: WFPL's Gabe Bullard blogs the news
[...] 31, 2009 in Local News | Tags: jobs, meta | by gabebullard We heard a lot of input on this story about employers blocking employees’ access to potentially distracting websites. Commenter [...]