I enjoyed Ben Zimmer's On Language piece on the pronoun we today: Link
I loved this anecdote:
Theodore Rockwell, who served as technical director for the U.S. Navy’s nuclear-propulsion program in the 1950s and ’60s, shared a telling anecdote about his onetime boss, the famously irascible Adm. Hyman G. Rickover. “One time he caught me using the editorial we, as in ‘we will get back to you by. . . .’ ” Rockwell recalled in his memoir, “The Rickover Effect.” “He explained brusquely that only three types of individual were entitled to such usage: ‘The head of a sovereign state, a schizophrenic and a pregnant woman. Which are you, Rockwell?’ ”
I certainly use we a lot when speaking to audiences about our organization, but I don't think it's the same thing. We do work collectively, but then so do editorial writers. The Tribune uses we in their editorials, and I never mind it.
One comment that made me chuckle was the one from the Lone Ranger: "We, kemo sabe?" Shu says that to me all the time, and it has become a one of those family phrases (similar to our "that and a dollar fifty will get you on the CTA.")