```json
{
    "title": "Microsoft: Scoble Posts Ballmer’s Memo",
    "url": "https://performancezen.com/2005/04/23/microsoft-scoble-posts-ballmers-memo/",
    "datePublished": "2005-04-23",
    "dateModified": "2005-04-23",
    "language": "en-US",
    "description": "Scoble posts Ballmer's memo. That Microsoft has a legislative agenda scares me. That this bill wasn't on it, and, as such, was then disowned by the company makes the scenario…",
    "author": "spierzchala",
    "publisher": "Performance Zen"
}
```

# Microsoft: Scoble Posts Ballmer’s Memo

> It's appropriate to invoke the company's name on issues of public policy that directly affect our business and our shareholders, but it's much less clear when it's appropriate to invoke the company's name on broader issues that go far beyond the software industry -- and on which our employees and shareholders hold widely divergent opinions. We are a public corporation with a duty first and foremost to a broad group of shareholders. On some issues, it is more appropriate for employees or shareholders to get involved as individual citizens. As CEO, I feel a real sense of responsibility around this question, and I believe there are important distinctions between my personal views on policy issues and when it's appropriate to involve the company.