Reputation Communications' staff of writers, editors and researchers contribute to You(Online): The Magazine.
View all posts by Reputation Communications Staff
Jessica Siegel offers a brief survey of the history of Photoshop’s impact on the advertising and publishing industries, and of the growing backlash against radical retouching.
Alongside issues of authenticity, the American Medical Association and the Better Business Bureau’s National Advertising Division add their concerns. Are new regulations on the way?
We hope so.
Yahoo CEO Scott Thompson’s departure reminds us just how relevant—and delicate—credibility and a sense of authenticity are.
One line on his resume, in which he incorrectly claimed to have earned a computer science degree, resulted in his dismissal. Hedge fund Third Point uncovered the inaccuracy via a “a rudimentary Google search,” making this controversy a powerful example of why executives must be sure that all information that they make available to the public is honest and factual. Driving the point home even more sharply, he won’t be receiving a severance package.
Lost Credibility
Opinions on the issue vary. On Forbes.com, Davia Temin said that, if this was an isolated “little lie,” he should be off the hook. “Let’s hope the Yahoo board has the courage to stand up to bullying by the dissidents and not fire its CEO over a minor technicality,” wrote Businessweek’s Larry Popelka. Jena McGregor weighed in on the Washington Post’s PostLeadership blog:
“In the end, it doesn’t really matter how great Thompson’s experience in his former jobs might have been, or who may have first cast doubt on his resume, or how disruptive his departure could be at a company that has had six CEOs (four designated and two interim) in five years. When credibility is called into question, everything else comes second.”
Interim CEO Ross Levinsohn, who previously served as its global media head, offers a new vision for Yahoo’s future. Reestablishing the company’s identity and reputation when internet hubs are declining in importance will be a daunting task, but Levinsohn appears intent on moving ahead. “In spite of the very bumpy road we’ve traveled, we are achieving genuine and meaningful successes in the marketplace every day and heading in the right direction,” he told Yahoo’s employees on Sunday.
When the Pulitzer Prize winners are honored at Columbia University later this month, one category will be conspicuously absent. For only the 11th time in the prize’s 95-year history, its board did not award the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction. One might attribute such inaction to a dismal year in fiction writing, but the ensuing uproar of disapproval suggests that this is an issue of perception and influence rather than literary crisis. Like other awards such as the Nobel Prize and the National Book Award, the Pulitzer Prize is important because we regard it as an authoritative and discerning arbiter of excellence. Since it is also so widely aspired to, it does more than honor extraordinary cultural achievement. It provides a quantifiable boost in sales to the sort of work that otherwise might not get the attention it deserves in the marketplace. Strong influence leads to significant expectations With such influence come significant expectations, though, and this year’s lack of a fiction winner has left many disappointed. Literary professionals are particularly incensed, including the Pulitzer jurors who read hundreds of submissions only see the board decline to recognize the three books they selected. “We were all shocked,” juror Susan Larson told NPR. “The Pulitzer is too prestigious and crucial an award to book lovers, authors and the publishing industry to be sporadically — and unaccountably— withheld,” wrote another juror, Maureen Corrigan, in the Washington Post. Struggling publishers and booksellers were also understandably upset. “I can’t imagine there was ever a year we were so in need of the excitement it creates in readers,” author and bookstore owner Ann Patchett lamented in the New York Times. Many readers, too, were left empty-handed. Entertainment Weekly‘s Stephan Lee described how his “mother, whose first language is not English, would always buy and spend a painstakingly long time to read and understand the Pulitzer-winning novel each year.” Ambiguity leaves room for negative conclusions This isn’t the first Pulitzer-less year in fiction, but the prize’s administrators should consider the fallout. If guaranteeing a prize every year would compromise its integrity, they could consider implementing a more transparent selection process. It’s unclear whether the board deemed all of this year’s fiction finalists unworthy or merely failed to reach the majority consensus required to select a winner. Such ambiguity leaves room for too many negative conclusions.
A new Neilsen study confirms that the best way by far to get your message to your audience is still through their friends. But what’s interesting is that consumer opinions posted online are the next most trusted source of information about companies.
Building forums into your company’s website are a good way to interact with those influencers. Their goodwill can be more important than any advertising in shaping your reputation.
Social media has played a central role in several of the most successful reputation management campaigns of the last few years.
In a recent Forbes.com article Scott Davis described how Toyota repaired its reputation following the bout of recalls that sent it plummeting in 2009 and 2010. The automaker employed a series of innovative social media strategies to engage with its customers on a personal level.
One of Toyota’s strategies was a series of Digg Dialogg Q&A sessions, which allowed the company to respond directly and candidly to customers and critics. Mashable’s Todd Wasserman said those sessions, “gave Toyota the appearance of achieving social media branding nirvana: Transparency.”
Transparency Paid Off
That approach clearly paid off, as Harris Interactive’s latest Reputational Quotient survey, published in February, ranks Toyota as the company with the most-improved reputation.
Harris Interactive’s survey reveals that few companies have seen their reputations improve lately. Joining Toyota in that small group is BP, which embraced social media in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon disaster.
Strategy Matters
Simply building a presence in social media isn’t enough. AT&T, for example, implemented an extensive social media customer service strategy aimed at rehabilitating its tarnished reputation.
The factors that separate an effective strategy from a failed one can be difficult to generalize. The best strategies seem to be tailor-made for a company, its customers, and the problems it is facing. Davis summed it up nicely: “Reputation is something that is both fragile yet resilient. The ability to spring back when it’s damaged takes a keen understanding of the factors and attitudes that shape a reputation to begin with.”
Yesterday Lady GaGa unveiled her Born This Way foundation, taking celebrity philanthropy to a new level.Her partners in the venture are The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University; the MacArthur Foundation and The California Endowment.
Born This Way addresses the disturbing social issue of adolescent bullying, including cyber bullying, the act of anonymous online harassment and defamation. Bullying has concerned the superstar for some time. She has been vocal about the issue as teen suicides in response to bullying have increased.
The Foundation is “dedicated to creating a safe community that helps connect young people with the skills and opportunities they need to build a braver, kinder world.”
As the world’s problems become more pressing, protesting unfair practices and helping raise money and visibility for important causes are increasingly important.
Change.org is an online petition platform that empowers anyone to start, join and win campaigns for social change by providing the tools to start, circulate, promote and effect change.
Change.org is a for-profit organization. It works with over 1000 of the largest organizations in the world and is organized around more than a dozen leading cause-based communities. They range from environmental issues and women’s rights to animal welfare. One of them might be well-suited for an issue you care about.
If you are a CEO, it is important to understand how and why a change.org petition might one day focus on your decisions – and your company.
Related reading: Activist Groups, Social Media & Corporate Reputation Risk.
Creating an entry for yourself or your business on Wikipedia can be a valuable reputation management tool. However, doing so requires navigating a strict set of rules and principles. Here is what you need to know.
Wikipedia requires that entries be about notable subjects and defines notability as:
“…the property of being worthy of notice, having fame, or being considered to be of a high degree of interest, significance, or distinction. It also refers to the capacity to be such.”
To prove notability, entries must cite authoritative sources.
Examples of authoritative sources include books, academic papers, reports published by credible organizations and articles from news organizations. Self-published books and promotional materials are not considered credible.
If the notability of the subject you are considering for Wikipedia cannot be supported by citations, Wikipedia editors will remove the new entry, often within minutes of its posting.
Anyone can edit, write or remove information on Wikipedia.
Many people are intimidated by the thought of having a Wikipedia entry about them because they fear damaging commentary will be added. But Wikipedia has a rule against featuring contentious material about living people – and this rule is actively supported. Wikipedia’s editors will quickly remove negative commentary unless it is accompanied by solid factual support.
Your entry must adhere to Wikipedia’s core principals.
Wikipedia requires editors maintain a neutral point of view, in addition to providing sources for all statements. Wikipedia will reject material that is written in a promotional style.
