Even as Seventeen celebrates the hiring of their new beauty editor, the non-anonymous blogger non-Nadine Haobsh non-female Desi Gallegos (whisked away from the associate beauty editorship at Teen People), the NYT and a brother in anonymous blogging arms stick up for almost-beauty editor Nadine Haobsh, who saw her job offer yanked when she was outed as beautyblogger Jolie. That was a very long sentence.

Jeremy Blachman, the Harvard law student who blogged as beleagured white-shoe hiring partner Anonymous Lawyer, leaps to Haobsh's defense* in today's op-ed pages, agreeing that, yes, people can get fired for all sorts of stupid stuff but that weblogs ought to be protected, dammit. Otherwise how would people know to slather on Jergens for a natural yet reasonably-priced glow? Or what goes on inside a white-shoe law firm? (er, just a quick note on that: didn't you make it all up? Not that it's not hilarious satire - especially this entry and this one too - but it's not, strictly speaking, the truth. Though as a former associate in a white-shoe firm I can definitely attest to the some-truth).

Blachman's point is that the public interest in free-flowing information ought to trump the employer's interest in not being outed as a vacation-ruining taskmaster or a spa-vacationing iPod-enjoying cosmetic-shilling SwagHag (did I just make that one up?). I'm actually not sure I agree; as much as I'm a fan of fighting the power and heeding the bloggy muse, I don't think random employees should be able to blog willy-nilly about their employers with impunity. There are obvious dangers inherent in that, particularly with respect to bloggers less thoughtful than Haobsh or fictionalized like Blachman. This is not to say that I don't think employers should be cool about anonablogs: after reading pretty much all of Jolie I didn't think she had crossed any lines at all and thought the LHJ firing was uncalled for and the rescinding of the Seventeen offer appalling (nice message to send to your readers about speaking out, Atoosa). But there are lines, and when employees cross them it's just as unfair to deny employers redress.

But don't take our word for it, see what Blachman has to say - he must be pretty convincing, considering that he actually recieved a bunch of résumés from law students wanting to work at his pretend slave-driver firm. Aw, kind of reminds me of how we got the Fishterns.

*It feels funny not to call you Jolie, Nadine. Sigh. But we all must grow up sometime. Fly, fly, fly, little bird.