Tag Archives: Scott L. Vernick

Reputation Reboot Advice

Reputation Reboot addresses real-life online reputation management (ORM) challenges faced by CEOs, executives, VIPs and their organizations. Unless they are public figures, their names and related descriptions of all individuals and companies discussed are changed to protect their privacy. For a quick look at the types of situations facing many professionals, scroll down and check out the headlines.

Can this Wall Street Journal article be buried?

I am an executive with a public relations firm. A client wants us to suppress an old Wall Street Journal article about an insider trading incident that currently appears on the first page of a Google search in the company’s name. Is this possible, and if so how long will it take?

Tread with caution…and don’t make promises you can’t keep. Here’s why. The Wall Street Journal  is a very high-ranking online platform. Twenty million readers visit its digital site every month. All those clicks keep it front and center on Google and other search engines.

To lower that article’s ranking you need to create a collection of higher-ranking “assets” (content). For example, if it is the third or fourth entry on a Google page of 10 entries you will need six or seven such assets just to get it off the first page. Then keeping it off is even harder–you will likely see the article resurface periodically on the first page of results. So you might need many more new types of content strategically added over a period of months.

In the meantime, expanding your client’s online profile will help diffuse the impact of that article. Ensure they are using all appropriate social media channels. By building on their strengths using all tools at your disposal you will help counterbalance the potential impact of that article.

Can this social media crisis be overcome?

I am recent college graduate with top honors. I failed to get a job after my prospective employer conducted a Google search of my name. The HR department found negative results related to a thoughtless campus stunt I participated in. It offended students and attracted substantial social media criticism, which appears at the top of search results about me.

One reason that material is at the top of your searches is that you don’t “own” any digital assets that would appear above it, minimizing its impact.

Try this two-step strategy. First, create a personal branding strategy to showcase your achievements and attain high-ranking information that will support you resume and mission. (Our FAQ article provides several examples of how to do that.) Given your career level, it should be a low-key and understated.

Write a short statement acknowledging your error and what you learned from it, including becoming more sensitive to cultural slights. This can be placed on an inside page of your personal branding website to acknowledge and “own” your unintentional error. It can also be used as a point of discussion in future interviews with future employers.

This approach will show you are not trying to conceal your mistake. It also provides an opportunity for demonstrating your ability to learn from an all-too-common lapse of judgement. Given the number of social media crises in today’s world, your experience in navigating this situation could just make you an asset to your future employer.

This tech firm hopes to conceal a sexual harassment lawsuit filing

Recently our technology firm was sued by an employee who claimed sexual harassment by our CEO. We think it is without merit and would like to hide the filing from the first page of our Google results.

We cannot help “bury” it—and exercise caution if other reputation management agencies assure you they can. Here’s why, along with a strategic option that will better position your firm to potentially overcome this issue:

Legal notices published on municipal and other government platforms are very high-ranking: they nearly always appear on the first page of Google. Once they appear, they are often republished on legal blogs—and by some law firms, which report such cases as a way to draw attention to their services (since their firm will come up in any searches of that lawsuit). If it does succeed in being “buried,” it is unlikely to stay off the first page of Google for very long. As the case moves forward, your company will be the focus of media articles which also rank very high.

Consider this strategy

Our advice is to take an alternative route. First, acknowledge the issue. Don’t try to hide it. Prepare a statement by your CEO, if he or she is still at your firm. (If he/she is, has an internal investigation been undertaken to evaluate whether he has a history or reputation for harassment? If so, your company’s board could be liable in a court of law—which could lead to worse online issues.)

Publish the statement on your company’s Facebook page. Included a reference with a link to your website. Next, look at your board. How diverse is it? If women and multicultural directors are not represented on it, consider adding more. Determine how prevalent they are in senior leadership and management roles. Studies show that when women are present on those levels, an organization’s culture often includes less harassment of all types. Should this situation grow into a crisis, their addition will symbolize the organization’s new steps to reboot its culture. Evaluate your HR policies and how they have handled similar complaints in the past. Survey your employees to elicit their concerns. (Survey Monkey has a selection of sexual harassment-related surveys that you can customize for such purposes.)

Transparency demonstrates concern

These steps are examples of transparent actions that, when taken, demonstrate a concern over sexual harassment and steps that are being taken to examine whether your company’s culture has (and does) allow it. By identifying these actions and keeping your employees and shareholders informed of them, you will be in a stronger position to address the lawsuit as well as to improve your online presence. That is because the online conversations about the situation, including your organization’s narrative, will show you are taking steps to investigate and rectify the situation, including the environment that permitted it.

If your CEO has a history of this type of behavior and he/she stays at the company, recognize that it may be a matter of time before more lawsuits are filed and the issue is promoted on blogs and social media. In such a situation, no attempts to “bury” it will work. On the other hand, should he/she take a leave of absence or exit the company, that action not only provides a symbolic example of a new chapter being turned, but may be an optimum time to consider publishing an Op-Ed piece in a national publication or trade magazine about the issue and how your organization has addressed it. It will rank highly online and enable you to take ownership of the story—or at least provide a balanced point of view.

How long should an online reputation management campaign last?

We hired an ORM provider five months ago. Our main concern was that there were four outdated items appearing in our top search results. Three of those items have been dealt with. But the worst is still showing up as the very first result of Google searches. We’ve seen it drop down to the second position. We were told it can take a long time to completely refresh the contents of a page. But our patience is wearing thin.

Many, if not most, online reputation campaigns require six to twelve months to show substantially improved results. (This is our experience as well as that of our colleagues throughout the industry.) A long-term program will be required if the items in question are on major news outlets or other prominent platforms and comprise more than half of the first page of search results. In our experience, six months might address 50% of those issues. If the client owns few “assets” (websites and social media profiles) and has not actively developed an online presence, a year is more realistic. There should be improvements within the first several weeks of the campaign, and the material will continue to shift and change location month by month.

A long-term program of new content generation, accompanied by smart SEO (search engine optimization), will ensure that once material is moved down, it stays there. If a provider promises quick solutions at cheap prices, do they also promise to return and fix any errant material that reappears after their campaign ends? Be sure to ask them how they handle such situations. Otherwise, you may be disappointed in your investment.

Can this defamatory blog post be removed?

I am the subject of a defamatory blog post that has been appearing at the top of my Google search results for over three years. I’ve tried everything, including hiring an ORM firm for several months. I saw some improvement in my search results overall, but that blog post is still at the top.  Can you help me?

Our first recommendation is to review the article “What to Do When You Are the Victim of Online Defamation” by David Klein, an attorney specializing in Internet law. He outlines several steps that can help in situations like yours. The first is to review the Terms of Use statement on the site hosting the blog post. If they don’t allow the type of defamatory content you describe you can contact the website’s administrator to request the removal of that post (and that request will have a high likelihood of succeeding).

To protect yourself from ORM issues such as this you need to create a stronger online identity. This means developing digital assets that will prevent third-party content from appearing at the top of searches in your name. There are several essential steps the ORM firm you hired should have taken—but didn’t. (The first would have been to check the blog’s Terms of Use, because the post in question is not simply negative commentary. It makes statements that are clearly both untrue and damaging. The second would have been to refer you to an attorney specializing in such issues.)

As a company leader, you may in the future face similar attempts to cast doubt on your credibility. The best way to prepare is to claim ownership of your name on every appropriate digital platform online and to implement a strong content strategy that presents a factual and compelling narrative about your achievements and leadership position.

How important is social media in an ORM campaign?

I am not active on social media (and due to the type of industry I work in, I’d rather not be). But I’ve been told that social media is key to online reputation management. Is it? Do I have alternatives for moving down old content that comes up when I am Googled?

Social media is one of several tools used in online reputation management. But social media alone is rarely the solution to ORM issues. Nor is it always an effective tool when dealing with “sticky” issues— situations involving substantial amounts of content on high-ranking platforms (such as articles on major media sites and legal notices on government sites).

To displace that type of content from the top Google results you need to publish new content on even higher-ranked platforms, or raise the rank of other content using search engine optimization. Highly ranked content is also more dynamic and tends to resurface, so the results need to be periodically monitored and maintained.

Social media campaigns are effective in countering lower-ranked content and bolstering the online image of brands that don’t have a strong online presence. As a general rule, the less information there is about an individual or organization online, the easier it is for social media content to quickly dominate their search results (this is also a reason why having a weak online presence is dangerous). The more information there is, the less effective a pure social media strategy will be. That is especially true in the case of high-profile figures in business and public life.

Can this online content be suppressed?

Last year, our company experienced a crisis that resulted in dozens of negative articles in the media. Fortunately, it was resolved. But when people Google us one of the main articles continues to show up on the first page of results after a search of our organization’s name. We have utilized first-rate crisis PR and have an online reputation management program in place. But that article hasn’t moved. What can we do to remove it from the top search results?

The crisis was given widespread attention, and the platform hosting this article is very credible. Those are two important reasons why Google has assigned the article a high page rank. Our research also shows the platform is making consistent updates to the article. That has made it even harder to displace. Google values continually updated content. Another contributing factor is the number of backlinks (links from other websites) to the article.

Your first step should be publishing a statement that provides factual information regarding the resolution of the crisis. It can attain a strong page ranking. That will give consumers and journalists researching your company an alternative to the article. Every time they visit, link to or share your statement, it will reinforce and increase its ranking (and that is one less visit, link or share for the article).

Along with the official statement, publish and link to other pages with relevant information on the crisis. As they become recognized as trusted sources of information regarding the issue, they will rise in page ranking. Outside parties will begin referencing and linking to your resources. Be sure and also continue your current ORM program and you should see that article drop off the first page of results.

We are available to develop a strategic plan that has the highest likelihood of succeeding.

An agency in the Middle East has a question

My agency is in the Middle East. We serve VIP clients and their organizations throughout the Gulf region, from Dubai to Qatar and beyond. Many are public figures. Periodically we seek assistance from online reputation management firms to edit their Wikipedia profiles and, in some cases, improve their online reputations. We have been told that in order to improve a client’s reputation, new websites may need to be built. But they don’t need new websites: they already have them, often more than one.  How does your agency handle such situations?

Regarding the Wikipedia editing, our history of success results from following Wiki’s rules, which include providing a credible third-party citation for most new entries. If you want to remove information on a Wikipedia page that is linked to an article from a recognized media outlet (whether in the Middle East or the West), that is a change the most experienced Wikipedia editor cannot guarantee. The best way to evaluate the viability of the revisions your client hopes to make is to provide us with a copy of the revised text. We can review it line by line and provide you with an annotated draft showing what is likely to be retained and what is likely to be deleted by Wiki editors. We are available to conduct that work after signing a non-disclosure agreement and working on a consulting basis. Then, with your approval, we will implement the agreed-upon revisions.

A Challenging Question

Your second question is trickier. We specialize in high-profile clients, so are experienced in resolving such issues. The best way to displace unwanted content from the first pages of search results is to create new, higher-ranking content. Often that includes creating specific types of new websites, and if the unwanted content is on prominent or respected media outlets, the new content must be of high quality and part of a long-term strategy. When the client already has a strong online presence, as it seems many of your clients do, sometimes it is possible to work with their existing websites using the techniques of search engine optimization (SEO).

Several Options Available

Which approach to new content you choose depends on the client’s existing online presence and on the nature of the reputation issue they are facing. Our first step is to conduct an audit of clients’ online presence and an analysis of the issue, then present it to clients with recommendations for mitigating reputational damage.  We often present several strategies for placing varieties of optimized content online. Then clients can evaluate all their options. Some issues produce strategies that take effect quickly. Other strategies won’t show results for the first three to five months, with up to a year before we see major impact. After that, the work will need to be maintained to keep the old material from resurfacing high on Google. That is the most sophisticated type of ORM, for the most prominent clients and the most high-profile issues.

Did This Client Select the Right ORM Firm?

We recently retained an online reputation provider. They presented us with the most cost-effective program and their work has led to an improvement in our online image. But two issues concern us. The first is that the fee has been increased and extended from the quote in the signed contract. The second is that we feel the provider’s approach is not appropriate for our image. The provider has been publishing new material about our company online. That material isn’t embarrassing, but it isn’t consistent with the way we present our brand. Is our experience fairly typical? Would we have better luck with a different provider?

ORM is an unregulated industry, with providers ranging from individual freelancers to enterprise-level corporations. Business practices vary just as dramatically. But almost all ORM providers share a very similar core approach.  What differentiates us is how we how we implement that approach, how we use the tools of ORM. Most every strategy will focus on publishing new content about you online. But the quality of the design and writing will differ. Higher quality materials require more resources to produce, but they can be more effective as ORM tools. Speaking directly to your issue, they also work to enhance your brand (rather than detract from it).

You should insist upon a clause in your contract that allows you to review and approve all materials before they are published online. (That includes reviewing customized URLs, which are often used in ORM campaigns.) Check if the materials you are uncomfortable with can be deleted and replaced with another “asset.”

Does your contract ensure that you have a list of all of the content and platforms that have been set up on your behalf, along with the administrative access codes? It should. Be sure and check whether your contract includes a steep surcharge if your payment is late…and a threat to delete all of the work done to date.

Content Quality Varies Broadly

Often — and with the best intentions — ORM providers will throw dozens of pieces of new content about you online to crowd your unwanted content out of search results. Unless the unwanted content has earned a very high search-engine ranking, the new material can be of low to very low quality and still achieve the core goal. As we write this, thousands of writers around the world are being paid hourly fees to create biographies, articles, press releases, website texts and other materials about clients like you. It can be generic or substantive, high or low quality. You’ll get a good sense of what you can expect by the quality of the provider’s own blogs, information FAQ and social media accounts, including Facebook and Twitter. Look at the photographs of the company leaders and staff. Are you comfortable putting your brand’s management in their hands?

Ultimately, an ORM campaign can provide value in two ways: contributing to your brand capital while also fulfilling its main purpose of repairing or strengthening your online presence. A sudden (and steep) fee increase early in your program raises a red flag, but only you can determine whether you want to continue investing in this program. There are certainly ORM providers who can present your brand in a way you are comfortable with. Our advice is to check with other firms to see how they can build on what has been done so far.

University aide seeks reputation protection during campus rape crisis

I am an administrator at one of the universities being investigated by the Department of Education for Title IX violations. (It is one of the universities featured in the documentary film The Hunting Ground.) As our institution becomes the focus of activist attacks, I am concerned about the impact on my own reputation— specifically, from becoming the focus of student protests. My position requires me to consider the university’s reputation as the highest priority, including protecting it from the reputational damage that can result from recognizing sexual assault claims and preventing any false claims from moving forward.

The crisis facing many universities today is similar to the one many companies faced during early Internet years.  Before mainstream (and smaller) organizations established online forums and social media platforms dedicated to monitoring and responding to consumer concerns, complaints and frustrations, consumers who failed to receive the help they sought would go elsewhere to raise attention to their issues. They would build their own communities of support. Those communities would produce a viral tidal wave of anger and criticism toward the organization.

We have written about this dynamic extensively: a few examples include the famous 2005 “Dell Sucks” incident, which led to the company transforming its customer service solutions. Carnival Cruiselines’ 2013 crisis is a well-known example, as is the Bank of America debacle, where a young woman angry at BoA’s fee increase launched a change.org petition that ended up on the national news…and quickly resulted in a BoA policy change.

Sexual assault far graver than consumer complaints

Sexual assault is an issue of much greater gravity than consumer complaints. We do not mean to imply otherwise.  But universities are now the focus of activists who are forming well-organized groups to share information, report assaults and hold press conferences to bring visibility to this issue—creating for themselves all the resources that universities have failed to provide them. With CNN’s recent airing of The Hunting Ground, the crisis has reached a new level.

If your university isn’t working to build new support systems for victims you are indeed in a difficult position. As an administrator facilitating the university’s communications on this topic, your comments to victims may be published on blogs, quoted to the media or videotaped (without your knowledge) and posted on YouTube. Those are all tactics that activists and frustrated citizens employ when their efforts to gain a fair hearing through traditional channels fail.

Compassion and empathy can’t change policies

If you can’t make substantive policy changes at your university, you can address victims with compassion. Empathy and emotional support are not a substitute for real support systems, but they can build bridges of trust.  Expressing them as much as is appropriate within your role will help you become known as part of the solution, caught in a difficult web of bureaucracy that will, we hope, one day serve students better.

MBA candidate wants a competitive edge in job market

I’m an MBA candidate preparing to reenter the job market. What is your advice for positioning myself as the ideal candidate? I worked in my field for three years before returning to school and want to impress prospective employers with the value I can provide them. They will all be Googling me before we meet.

To make the strongest impression, establish a blog that focuses on your targeted industry, with a complementary Twitter or Instagram feed. Commit to a consistent posting schedule: at minimum, one post every week (try for two or three).

Follow media commentary on the companies, influencers and journalists who lead your industry, as well as the top stories in related fields.

Create a Content Plan….and Bring a Fresh Angle to the Discussion

Draw upon the most-discussed news, trends, products and services, but create a content plan that ensures you bring a fresh perspective to the discussion. Then begin posting regularly. Shoot for three a week: one featuring your own commentary, another that republishes someone else’s and a final post in which you highlight the top news stories of the week and analyze their significance.

Republish one post a week through your LinkedIn profile (more than that could be overkill) and use your other social media channels to amplify its distribution. But don’t use social media only as a tool for self-promotion. Use it mainly as a way to highlight and share the tweets or posts of others. Shining your social media spotlight on everyone else is the best way to raise your own profile in an authentic and generous way.

Include a link to your blog in your email signature so prospective employers, as well as your colleagues and other contacts, will know about it. As a demonstration of your knowledge of your industry, and of your digital expertise, it will serve you well in your job search. It will definitely differentiate yourself from your peers…and for some it can turn into a major asset in their long-term career development.

Help sought for burying legal notices

I am the COO of a privately held firm. Four years ago we were involved in a lawsuit. Documents pertaining to that case are still showing up prominently in search results—the Notice of Hearing appears directly below our company website. I understand it can’t be removed entirely, but that it can be relegated further down in search results. How quickly could you do that?

Legal notices are difficult to dislodge because they are on high-ranking sites and often have been aggregated by legal websites and linked to from blogs. If they have also been referenced in business articles, they are even more deeply embedded online. And the longer they have stayed there, the harder they will be to move. Longevity is a factor Google (and other search engines) consider when determining page rank. Another factor is the credibility of sites hosting the content. Of the many sites hosting those documents, you’ll likely see government-run sites at the top. (They are considered to be very credible.)

We have been effective at displacing those types of documents, moving them to page 2 (and lower) in search results. This comprehensive strategic program takes a minimum of six months to implement, and usually must be continued for several more. That is the case for most online reputation management campaigns dealing with highly ranked material. Simply putting new content online won’t make a dent in the location of massive sites like the ones that publish legal notices. The key is the optimization of the new content. Raising it to the top of search results is a process—as are the steps necessary to force down the notices.

So if you are contemplating such a campaign, understand that there are no short cuts. At a certain level, such as if the notice is for a federal indictment, it may even be beyond what ORM can handle. In that case, a full rebranding may be in order.

New CEO needs image appealing to investors

I’m a 29-year-old male and the CEO of a new company. I’m preparing to approach investors and I’d like to project a more mature image online. (I’m not in the tech industry, so the old images of me wearing T-shirts and jeans will not help my work with bankers.)

Those photos have been online long enough that they have been aggregated by many sites and they now fully populate your Google results. The solution is to take a variety of new photos and then post them intelligently but broadly. Try a range of garments, from power suits to open shirt collars and blue blazers (and, yes, even jeans). Tag them and publish them in all of your profiles. Start integrating that style into your wardrobe, too, so it will become an authentic part of your image

Then take it a step further and have a professional-quality video made to introduce yourself to potential investors (or to introduce your company and its strengths). Not only are videos a compelling way to communicate your passion, expertise and vision, they also rank very highly on search engines. If it is appropriate, set up a YouTube platform for this purpose. That will help ensure it appears near the top of Google search results. If you prefer less widespread exposure, host it on Vimeo and embed it onto your website, LinkedIn profile and other appropriate sites.

Before the cameras roll consult a media trainer to help you shape your message and the way you deliver it. That’s what many CEOs who’ve succeeded in raising capital have done…and it’s why they look so good on TV. We’d be happy to recommend several excellent image consultants.

Executive aims to minimize age discrimination

I am a mature female executive with over 20 years experience in the corporate world. I am preparing to search for a new position at a new company. How should I update my online profile so it is as competitive as possible — and helps me avoid the possibility of age discrimination?

The Internet presents many opportunities to update your image and showcase your skills. Take a three-prong approach: update your online profiles, have new headshots taken and implement a content strategy that will help distinguish you from other candidates.

Start with your online profiles. Make sure your LinkedIn profile conveys your strengths and professional achievements. Potential employers will Google your name, and your LinkedIn profile will show up close to the top of those searches. Ensure you have a well-thought out profile on Google+, too, and on other appropriate platforms.

Next, your mindset

Once you’ve polished your professional profile and made it easily accessible, it is time to look at your physical image. We checked in with style strategist Margo Hason, a certified professional member of the Association of Image Consultants International (AICI), to elicit her advice.“Check your mindset,” she advised. “Dress and groom yourself to make age irrelevant and change your mindset to “age is irrelevant.”

“Two weeks before a headshot appointment meet with your hairstylist to discuss what hairstyle will work best in a photo shoot. Use your cell phone camera to test how it looks in a photo. Then meet with a makeup artist a week before the photo shoot. Make an appointment with your hairstylist and makeup artist for the day of the photo shoot. Or if the photographer’s studio will be supplying those services, bring the test photos from your sessions with both.

How do you want to be seen?

“Determine how you want to be seen,” she added. “If you want to appear in the photo as “professionally approachable” wear textured fabric and a flattering color—for example, a knit top or jacket. If you want to appear as a “professional in authority” or as an expert, wear a structured jacket with smooth fabric and darker in color.  It does not have to be black. Select a dark color that flatters you: a dark blue, burgundy or green. Bring several garment options to the photo shoot. Test to see which colors flatter you with the lighting available. Natural light can be softer, and more flattering.

“Ask to see the photos during the session.  Make sure your face is well lit, your eyes are shining and animated and that you have a natural smile. It can take practice. Keep taking photos and practicing the communication with your eyes and smile. It’s not your age that matters. It’s all about letting your personality and professionalism shine.” For additional tips on updating your image, check out Forever Cool: How to Achieve Ageless, Youthful and Modern Personal Style, by Sherrie Mathieson.

Have the photographer take several shots in each outfit, using different poses. This will produce a variety of photographs that you can publish on a variety of personal profiles. Put the best one on LinkedIn and the others on any other online profiles you may have, including alumni and professional organizations. If you have a professional bio at work, put one there. You want to have many current portraits online. They will displace old images and images you don’t control.

Your content strategy

If you are not already publishing a blog or articles online, seriously consider developing a content strategy. Content creation and social media use are highly valued skills in virtually every industry today. Your articles or blog can also showcase your knowledge and experience in your industry. Whether you publish on sites like Medium, on an industry trade magazine’s site or on a blog they will show up in the top results for a search of your name.

Maintain a Twitter account and use it for professional, rather than personal, topics. Follow Twitter feeds by journalists and experts in your field, as well as your peers. Platforms like Hootsuite allow you to follow all tweets related to a specific topic and help you manage your own social media account. Commit to it long term and post new content consistently. A content strategy that engages multiple digital platforms will be the most impressive to prospective employers. If it seems overwhelming, outsource both the writing and social media. There are plenty of writers available wherever you live who will work within your budget.

Can this businessman become invisible online?

I have a prominent background in the business world. There is considerable information about me online. None of it is negative. But it no longer reflects my lifestyle and I would like to suppress it. I’ve spoken with online reputation management firms and have been told they will need to create a lot of new content about me in order to move it off of the first two pages of Google. However, I prefer to be as private as possible and would rather have nothing there. Is that possible?

Unfortunately, it is necessary to add new content to supplant the old information. There is no way around that. But there is a way to do it with minimal impact on your privacy. The secret is to prepare a content plan that takes up the most space while saying the least about you. Because of your high profile, it should be as elegant as it is understated.

This strategy should be customized, with copy, design and an overall plan that is created specifically for you.  The company you work with cannot fall back on templates, and you should be involved in every step, including knowing what will be published about you, and where and when it will be published. Often ORM campaigns involve publishing dozens of generic-looking profiles with brief bios and headshots on innumerable social media and other digital sites. This works for many people and can be inexpensive. But it is not the best or most appropriate strategy for a client like you. So when you interview firms, ask who will be creating your strategy, what their review and approval process is and whether they will inform you what platforms your information will be published on before it goes live.

Employee reviews are a concern online and off

As an HR executive in a high-profile company, I’m concerned about the employee reviews that appear about it online. The firm is continuing to win multi-million dollar contracts with many, so the reviews don’t seem to be affecting business. But they send a bad signal about the company. Most comments date back to the firm’s previous management. But prospective employees and clients who read them don’t know that. What actions can we take?

It sounds like the company does not have a system in place for collecting and publishing employee reviews. They should. There are a number of ethical ways to do so. Once a company begins eliciting them, more positive ones can be republished and amplified on a variety of social media channels, contributing to a more well-balanced view of its organization.

Understand that neither review management systems nor online reputation management can make negative employee reviews disappear. Most of the sites where they appear (most notably Glassdoor) are “super sites” — huge platforms that cannot be magically transported to the bottom depths of Google.

We have seen Glassdoor reviews appear less prominently on searches (on the second or third pages of results) when companies have an extensive online presence. That means they own and are discussed on many high-ranking sites. So expanding your firm’s online presence can also be an effective strategy. Online reputation management can help with that.

Additional tips

Showcase the best aspects of your company’s culture on your company’s website. That’s where prospective employees, board members and shareholders will research it. Some tips:

  • Use real photographs of your office and employees at work.
  • Create a new section for a series of videos of employees discussing their experiences at the company and what new employees can expect. Explore the feasibility of inviting successful alumni to comment on how their experience with the company helped them land where they are.
  • If your office is located in an appealing area, include descriptions and footage of the surrounding area, from cafés and parks to transportation hubs.

Caveat

Realize that employee reviews, like all online reviews, are subjective. Unhappy employees are far more likely to publish reviews than satisfied ones. So are employees who have been dismissed.  Experts say that initiating a monthly and quarterly employee survey to elicit their feedback can help you establish a better company culture. In the long term, that may contribute to more positive reviews.

Nude photographs of an executive surface online

I am a risk and compliance director at a publicly traded company. A few days ago a longtime senior executive (who is married) confided to me that his private laptop was hacked during a recent trip to Europe. Nude photographs of him (and especially compromising ones at that) were on the laptop and have been published online. I have since learned that the photographs are selfies and are being posted in a variety of sites. Our company’s quarterly earnings report will be released next week. Today one of the images was posted with his name—and our company name. So far, these haven’t risen higher than the fifth page of results in Google searches of our company. But I’m concerned that we will soon see them on page one.

This issue requires triage on four fronts: legal, IT, PR and risk and compliance. First, dedicate a team to tracking the publication of the images and contacting the webmasters of each site to request their removal. Most major sites have a “Terms of Use” clause in fine print (usually located at the bottom of their home page). The publication of the photos will break those rules in many but not all cases.

Next, contact Google’s Request Remove Content page. Google will remove from search results photographs that have been posted without the knowledge and consent of subjects. If webmasters will not remove the material, file a request with Google for each one.

Check with Legal: Does Your Company Have a Social Media Policy?
At the onset of this process, review your company’s social media policy to determine if it addresses this type of issue. According to attorney Scott L. Vernick, only 50% of corporations have social media policies in place at all. Check and see if HR has a system for assisting employees who find themselves in such a position. Consider educating your employees about digital security and privacy risks. In the meantime, your security department should debrief the executive to determine whether the identity of the likely source behind the postings is known. If so, your legal department can evaluate appropriate actions (if any are possible). Cyber forensics can often determine the source of the material. If that is an option you want to pursue, attorney David O. Klein is an expert in Internet and technology law.

Have a question you would like addressed? Post it in the comments section below. We can’t respond to all inquiries but will consider questions relevant to the focus of this column. To gain more insight into online reputation management, read our most popular article: The Essentials: Online Reputation Management FAQs for Everyone.

Is this online reputation management pitch legitimate?

An online reputation management firm contacted me with a pitch to create copyrighted content about me online. It would then then sue platforms that have written about me, forcing them to remove the information from their websites. The claim would be that they published copyrighted content without permission. Is this legitimate? They want to be paid up front with no guarantees.

Buyer beware. This sounds like a ploy that was featured in a Wall Street Journal investigative report on May 15, 2020, “Google Hides News, Tricked by Fake Claims.”  It’s behind a paywall, so here are key passages:

The Journal identified hundreds of instances in which individuals or companies, often using apparently fake identities, caused the Alphabet Inc. unit to remove links to unfavorable articles and blog posts that alleged wrongdoing by convicted criminals, foreign officials and businesspeople in the U.S. and abroad.

“Google took them down in response to copyright complaints, many of which appear to be bogus, the Journal found in an analysis of information from the more than four billion links sent to Google for removal since 2011.

“Yet some requests, the Journal found, appear to be from people manipulating the system in ways it didn’t intend, resulting in Google’s taking down lawful content.

One man “sent Google a series of copyright claims against blogs and a law-firm website that discussed his case, claiming they had copied the posts” from his website. “That wasn’t true, the Journal determined, but Google erased the pages from its search engine anyway.”

After the Journal informed Google of its findings, Google restored more than 52,000 links it had removed and “identified more than 100 new abusive submitters.”

Meaning all the people who paid for that fake removal tactic, lost both their money and their results.

 
 

We originally published this article in 2014, excerpting it from a March 13, 2014 presentation made by Scott L. Vernick, Esq. at the Business Insurance Risk Summit. It was recently cited in the December 2017 issue of Security Management magazine.

How Popular is Social Media? By the numbers…Social media policies

  • #1: Social media is the most used activity on the web.
  • 2 hours: The average time spent on social media per day.
  • 3 out of every 4 adults use some form of social media.
  • 55-64 year-olds make up the fastest growing users of Twitter.
  • 65% of time spent on social media happens on mobile devices.
  • 72 of the 75 industries represented in the Fortune 500 use Facebook & Twitter.
  • 20 billion minutes are spent on Facebook every single day.

BUT, only 40% of companies have a formal social media policy.

Sources: Business Insider, Marketing Charts, Pew Research, FastCompany, Mashable, Forbes, TechCrunch, SHRM

Sampling of Popular Social Media Brands

  • Multiply
  • Instagram
  • Flickr
  • YouTube
  • SnapChat
  • Tumblr
  • Vine
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Pinterest
  • Myspace
  • Google Plus +
  • DeviantArt
  • VK
  • LiveJournal
  • Tagged
  • Orkut
  • CafeMom
  • Ning
  • Meetup
  • myLife
  • Classmates

Social Media –The Good News

  • Used correctly, social media can advance online commerce, build business relationships and facilitate internal collaboration.
  • Mobile commerce (sales transacted through mobile devices) yields $85 billion in sales worldwide.
  • Approximately 87% of all Fortune 100 companies use at least one social networking site.
  • According to Forbes.com, 78% of consumers say that the posts made by companies on social media influence their purchases.
  • Using social media boosts website traffic:
    • 185% lift in web traffic after achieving 1,000 Facebook likes.
    • Businesses with 51 to 100 Twitter followers generate 106% more traffic than those with 25 or fewer followers.

Sources: Internet Retailer, mediabistro, Business 2 Community

Social Media –The Bad News

  • Accessibility to social media may lead to workplace misconduct:
    • Violations of privacy laws, including the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, the Electronic Communications Protection Act, the Stored Communications Act and similar state laws.
    • Disclosure of trade secrets, misappropriation of confidential and proprietary information, and misuse of intellectual property.
    • Title VII exposure (for comments based upon race, gender, age, sexual orientation and similar subjects).
    • Defamation, harassment and violence.
    • Pornography/obscenity.
    • Violations of labor laws.
    • Unauthorized and deceptive endorsements.
    • Employee gripe sessions which damage morale.
    • Slacking (excessive use of social media).
    • Violations of other workplace policies.

Potential Issues

  • Using social media in hiring and pre-employment screening.
  • Employer liability for harassing, false and/or defamatory posts by employees.
  • Monitoring employees’ social media activities.
  • Accessing employees’ public profiles.
  • Accessing employees’ restricted/password-protected profiles.
  • Restrictions imposed by the National Labor Relations Act.
  • Drafting effective social media policies.
  • Drafting effective “bring your own device” policies.

Using Social Media in Hiring and Pre-employment Screening

  • More than a third of all companies use social media to screen potential candidates.
  • In 2013, 43% of all hiring managers who have used social media to screen potential candidates have found something that has caused them not to hire a candidate. This is an increase of 9% from 2012.
  • Top 3 Disqualifiers: (i) provocative or inappropriate photos; (ii) information about applicant drinking or drug use; and, (iii) bad mouthing previous employers.
  • Remarkable how many employees are not accurate about their credentials. According to the Society for Human Resource Management, 53% of résumés contain discrepancies.

Sources: Forbes, CareerBuilder

Why should you care?

  • By using social media, employers might learn information that is unlawful to consider in making an employment decision, including:
    • Race, religion, national origin, age, reproductive status, marital status, disability and sexual orientation.
  • An inconsistent use of social media and lack of uniformity in research techniques can open employers up to challenges to their hiring practices.

Recommendations

  • Create internal procedures for making employment decisions based on online research and social media to avoid or minimize potential liability.
  • Follow these internal procedures and be consistent about what information is gathered from social media sites.
  • Keep records of information from social media sites reviewed and used in any employment decision. Note that “selective checks” (e.g., using social media data for some applicants but not others) pose a risk of liability.
  • Use someone not involved in the hiring process (i.e., an outside vendor) to conduct the review and filter out any “protected class” information (e.g., race, religion, national origin, age, reproductive status, marital status, disability and sexual orientation) while providing only lawful information for consideration in hiring.

The use of social media in pre-employment screens may have Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) implications:

  • For outside vendors, providing social media data to employers may give rise to liability under the FCRA. See United States v. Spokeo Inc., No. CV12-05001, (C.D. Cal., 2012) (social media data that is sold to employers and used for pre-employment screening purposes may fall within the definition of “consumer report” and trigger FCRA obligations).
  • Employers should consider requiring indemnification from any third-party provider of social media information as a shield against potential liability under FCRA, privacy and discrimination laws, and copyright statutes.
  • Employers are not “consumer reporting agencies” requiring authorization from a potential employee. But, it is a good practice to disclose when social media will be searched and get signed FCRA authorization forms from candidates.
  • After getting signed FCRA authorization forms, employers may conduct background checks as part of the hiring process.

Employers should not:

  • Attempt to bypass a person’s privacy settings in collecting social media information about a candidate (e.g., creating a fake account to gain access to a candidate’s private social media profile).
  • Conduct background checks using social media sites for any reason, unless and until you receive a signed release from the candidate.
  • Make employment decisions based upon a candidate’s “off duty” but otherwise lawful conduct (such as tobacco or alcohol use), which employers are generally prohibited from considering.
  • Assume that others in your company (i.e., managers) are not using social media data to screen candidates for employment even if your company has no official policy on it. Their actions may implicate FCRA and create additional grounds for liability.

Employer Liability For Harassing, False, and/or Defamatory Posts By Employees

  • If an employee posts allegedly harassing, false and/or defamatory information about another employee on a social media site, is the employer liable for that content?
    • Possibly. Factors that will be considered:
  • Was the company aware of the postings? Should it have been aware?
  • Is the activity part of a pattern of harassment in the workplace?
  • Does the company derive any benefit from the social media activity?
    • Solution: Make clear in your social media policy that it applies to social media activity related in any way to the company’s business, employees, customers, or competitors.

Monitoring Employees’ Social Media Activities

•Is an employer obligated to monitor its employees’ off-duty social media activity?

–Probably not . . .

•In Maypark, et al. v. Securitas Security Services, et al., 775 N.W.2d 270 (Wis. Ct. App. 2009), the Court held that employers “have no duty to supervise employees’ private conduct or to persistently scan the worldwide web to ferret out potential employee misconduct.”

–BUT, an employer cannot ignore harassment at the workplace, including harassment in social media, and other illegal conduct.

•In Blakey v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 751 A.2d 538 (N.J. 2000), the Court held that, if the employer had notice that its employees were harassing other employees on social media sites, then “the employer would have a duty to remedy that harassment.”

•In Doe v. XYC Corporation, 887 A.2d 1156 (N.J. Super. Ct. 2005), the Court held that “an employer who is on notice that one of its employees is using a workplace computer to access pornography, possibly child pornography, has a duty to investigate the employee’s activities and to take prompt and effective action to stop the unauthorized activity, lest it result in harm to innocent third-parties.”

Recommendations Regarding Monitoring Employees’ Off-Duty Conduct

–Employers should monitor its employees’ off-duty conduct whenever there is a legitimate business reason for the monitoring because . . .

•Helps prevent discrimination and harassment.

•Helps prevent disclosure of confidential information.

•Helps prevent defamation and disparagement.

•Could be a good way to keep up on what your employees are thinking and saying.

•Helps to protect the goodwill of the company.

•Prevents liability for criminal conduct (i.e., cyber-stalking, cyber-bullying).

Accessing Employees’ Public Profiles

•Can an employer access an unrestricted (public) profile?

Moreno v. Hanford Sentinel, Inc., Cal.App.4th (2009)

•A college student, Cynthia Moreno, posted an “Ode to Coalinga” on her social media account, which contained some extremely unflattering and negative commentary about the town and those who lived there.

•The local paper got a hold of, and published, the “Ode.” Moreno and her family then received death threats and eventually left town. They later sued for disclosure of what they viewed as “private facts” (the Ode).

•The case was dismissed because Moreno’s posting made “ . . . her article available to any person with a computer and thus opened it to the public eye” and “her potential audience was vast . . . .”

–Answer: Likely, yes. That which has been placed in the public domain is not off limits for an employer to review.

Accessing Employees’ Restricted/Password-Protected Profiles

•Can an employer access a restricted profile?

–The short answer is NO.

Pietrylo v. Hillstone Restaurant Group, CIV.06-5754(FSH), 2009 WL 3128420 (D.N.J. Sept. 25, 2009)

•Employees of a restaurant created a group MySpace page “ . . . to vent about any BS while at work without any outside eyes spying in on us . . . . ”

•A manager learned of the site and requested an employee’s log-in ID and password to the site, which he ultimately received. The employees were then fired for damaging morale and for violating the restaurant’s “core values.”

•The Court concluded that the employer coerced the employee into giving her private log-in ID and password information.

–There are currently 26 states that have enacted or proposed legislation that restrict employer access to an
employee’s restricted profile.

Restrictions Imposed By The National Labor Relations Act

•Does the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) have implications for social media?

–Background on the NLRA:

•The NLRA applies to both union and non-union companies.

•Under Section 7 of the NLRA, employers cannot impede an employee’s right to engage in “protected activity” (e.g., discussion of wages, complaints about working conditions/safety, or conduct that can be reasonably construed by employees as a restriction on these activities). These rights are referred to as Section 7 rights.

•The NLRA is enforced by the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).

–Are social media posts “protected activity” under the NLRA?

•Statements made by employees in social media can, arguably, be entitled to protection under Section 7 as “protected activity” if the employee is using social media to discuss wages, benefits, or work conditions.

Overbroad social media polices violate the NLRA

•In Karl Knauz Motors Inc., 358 NLRB No. 164 (2012), the NLRB held that a car dealership’s “courtesy” rule in its employee handbook violated the NLRA because: (i) the policy prohibited disrespectful or profane language harmful to the business; (ii) the policy was overbroad because employees would reasonably believe that it prohibited statements of protest or criticism of the employer; and, (iii) the policy interfered with employee rights under the NLRA.

–Examples of overbroad social media policies:

•“The company prohibits disparaging, discriminatory or defamatory comments when discussing the company, the employee’s superiors, or co-workers.”

•“Without prior consent, employee may not participate in social media that disparages, misrepresents or negatively impacts employer.”

•“Behavior considered unacceptable, may result in disciplinary action, including but not limited to, carrying of tales, gossip and discussion regarding company business or employees . . . .”

•Employers cannot discharge an employee for social media posts that trigger Section 7 rights.

–In Hispanics United of Buffalo Inc., 359 NLRB No. 37 (2012), the NLRB held that the employer’s termination of five employees for posting negative remarks about their jobs on Facebook violated the NLRA because: (i) the employees’ posts were about productivity in the workplace (i.e., whether certain employees were working harder than others); and, (ii) the “employees have a protected right to discuss matters affecting their employment amongst themselves.”

•There are limits to Section 7 rights.

–Employee’s profanity-based comments about the company and her supervisor on Facebook in which she allegedly told her supervisor to “back the freak off” constituted unprotected “boasting and griping.” See NLRB Advice Memo in Tasker Healthcare Group d/b/a Skinsmart Dermatology (May 8, 2012).

–Employers should consider the following questions in determining whether a social media policy violates the NLRA:

•Does the employer’s social media policy restrict discussions about collective bargaining, wages, corrective actions and discharge of coworkers, employer investigations, or working conditions?

–Any such restrictions may result in an NLRA violation.

•Does the policy prohibit communication with certain people or categories (e.g., other co-workers, union representatives and the media)?

–Does the policy prohibit conversations with anyone, including coworkers?

•If yes, then the policy is likely overbroad.

•The policy is also overbroad if it tends to chill employees’ rights to discuss work conditions with fellow co-workers.

–Was an employee using social media to engage in an individual gripe?

•If yes, the employer may regulate the conduct.

•But, if the “gripe” was a continuation of a previous group grievance, then regulating the conduct may violate the NLRA.

Drafting Effective Social Media Policies: Considerations to Keep in Mind

•Generally, what are the considerations to keep in mind when drafting a social media policy for the work environment?

–Outline a social media strategy that fits your business objectives, then craft a policy that fits these needs.

Recommendations

•Zappos.com (recruits employees through social media and allows social media on the job as long as the customer’s needs are met).

•Green Bay Packers (social media equals distractions; it is banned at work).

–Why have a policy?

•Social media issues are becoming more prevalent.

•Legislation about employer access to employee social media accounts has been introduced or is pending in at least 26 states in 2014. Many of these laws protect employee privacy with respect to their social media accounts.

•A clear policy setting forth the parameters of proper social media reduces the risk of liability.

Recommendations

–Determine the policy that best fits your company’s needs. No one policy is perfect:

•Determine what can be accessed and the limitations of use. Consider whether social media is: (i) allowed for approved use during work; (ii) not allowed during work (e.g., no social media while on the clock or while on company computers) but allowed for approved use outside of work; or, (iii) prohibited for all work-related use.

•If allowing personal use during work time, clearly set out the limitations.

–Define prohibited conduct and state that violations will result in disciplinary action.

•State that offensive, demeaning, defamatory, discriminatory, harassing, abusive, inappropriate, illegal remarks, or personal gripes are prohibited.

Do not prohibit protected activity under NLRA

•Employees have the right to post or carry on conversations on social media sites regarding wages and working conditions.

•The policy should be clear and specific so as not to trigger NLRA liability. Provide examples so as to further clarify the policy.

–Be consistent with existing policies.

–Reduce expectation of privacy.

•Clearly state that there is no expectation of privacy in use of social media or communications prepared on a company computer, even if deleted.

•Employees use of social media can and will be monitored (even personal use).

Create limitations on use of:

•Company name in posting or identity.

•Limit use and/or mention of competitors, employees or clients in postings.

•Prohibit posting of confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information.

•Employees can blog on their own time but remind them to comply with the terms of use for their sites and to refrain from exercising their personal opinions in a way that can be construed to be the company’s opinion.

Explain who owns certain material.

•Explain what materials belong to the company and what belongs to the employee. (e.g., posts on topics unrelated to the business typically belong to the employee).

•Prohibit unauthorized dissemination of company material.

On March 26, 2014, “Creating Effective BYOD (Bring Your Own Device) Policies” by Scott L. Vernick will be published.

Scott L. Vernick is a partner at Fox Rothschild LLP and a nationally ranked trial lawyer. He represents Fortune 500 companies in commercial litigation matters that focus on technology, intellectual property, health care, privacy and data security.

 
 
Social activism impacting reputations

The Washington Post has published “The Fall of Roger Ailes,” an article that references 25 women who claim the former Fox News CEO harassed them. Their details support Gretchen Carlson’s sexual discrimination lawsuit against him. This situation won’t hurt Fox’s ratings.  If anything, it will increase them.

It could hurt the Murdoch family, though. As more proof emerges that Roger Ailes led a culture rich in sexual harassment, the Murdochs will face a growing quagmire. Job discrimination is often linked to harassment. Federal laws govern such discrimination. The Ailes’ lawsuit has opened a Pandora’s box to a company culture that will be revealed in coming weeks. Details will spill online and off regarding not just Fox’s former CEO, but the many executives and news hosts who supported his behavior.

Rupert Murdoch is impervious to such associations. But his sons James and Lachlan, who now run his media empire with him, may not want to be affiliated with such a culture. With Fox their most profitable asset, how they navigate this crisis will be telling.

We often write about reputational threats to CEOs. As a contributor to The Wall Street Journal‘s “Crisis of the Week” column, I follow situations like this as they unfold, wondering how they were allowed to reach such a crisis point. In months to come, Gretchen Carlson’s lawsuit could look small compared to the potential damage Fox News itself may face.

If you are a CEO, there are several ways you can ensure you do not find yourself in this type of position. Don’t stumble in the diversity arena. Stay aware of the key issues concerning women, especially those regarding employment opportunities, the lack of women on boards and the glass ceiling that continues to face many. Tuning in to these and related concerns will help you avoid becoming the focus of the next wave of hashtag protests (and nightly newscasts). It will also help ensure you avoid the type of reputation crisis that can impact your brand as well as your company’s stock valuation.

Here are additional tips to avoid other common workplace missteps:

1. Don’t be an out of touch CEO.  CEOs attract blowback online when their actions or public comments make them appear out of touch with the majority of their customers and their community.

2. Beware of backtracking boards. Before making a big decision that will be evaluated by the greater public, boards of directors should seek outside opinion regarding how their decision will be viewed by the world at large. That includes the part that forms their consumer base. Too many boards continue to green-light decisions from which they have to publicly backtrack after consumers launch protests.  Doubtful?  Check out change.org and scan the numerous public petitions targeting public companies and various other organizations.  These often go viral and end up on national news.

3. Monitor mean managers. And don’t be a jerk at work. Otherwise, you can become the subject of a discrimination suit like this one. So can your managers.

4. Encrypt your emails. Or just don’t say it in an email.

 
 

This is excerpted from a March 13, 2014 presentation made by nationally-ranked trial lawyer Scott L. Vernick at the Business Insurance Risk Summit in New York City.  The second in a two-part series, it was preceded by: How to Create Effective Social Media Policies: A Legal Primer.

Generally, what are the considerations to keep in mind when drafting a “bring your own device” (BYOD) policy for the work environment?

–      What is a BYOD?  BYOD programs allow employees to use personally owned devices to connect and interact with their employers’ business networks for work-related matters.

–      What are the benefits?  Increased workforce productivity and lower costs of administration.

–      Why does BYOD matter?  The BYOD movement is here to stay.  A recent survey revealed that 71 million BYOD devices are currently in use in the United States, and this number is expected to grow to 108 million by 2016.

Sources: CIO.com, Cisco Internet Business Solutions Group

BYOD programs create potential legal issues for employers:

–      Protecting Confidential Information:  BYOD programs may lead to misappropriation of proprietary company information, disclosure of trade secrets, and other security risks.

–      Employee Privacy Issues:  An employer may inadvertently access an employee’s private data in violation of federal and state laws.

–      e-Discovery and Litigation Issues:  An employer has an obligation to retain documents in the event of litigation – this includes documents that are stored in an employee’s personal device.

–      Off-The-Clock Work:  Because a BYOD program allows an employee to work after hours, it may trigger overtime and other wage and hour liability under the Fair Labor Standards Act and similar state laws.

Recommendations:  Have a BYOD strategy in place.

•      Some workplaces are more conducive to BYOD programs than others.

•      Assess the risks and determine whether a BYOD program is right for you.

•      For example, if preserving the security/confidentiality of internal communications is a material priority, then a BYOD program may not be appropriate.

–     Not having a BYOD strategy may prove costly.

•      In Brooks v. AM Resorts, LLC, 954 F. Supp.2d 331 (E.D. Pa. 2013), an employee allowed his employer to “remotely access and control” his personal computer through a computer program.

•      After the employee’s termination, the employee planned on suing the employer, and the employee accused the employer of using the remote access program to access his attorney-client privileged emails.

•      The Court denied the employer’s motion for summary judgment and held that there was a “genuine dispute of material fact” as to whether the employer improperly accessed the employee’s personal emails in violation of the Stored Communications Act.

•      Recommendations: Considerations in creating a BYOD policy.

–     Communicate expectations on how the device will be used/maintained (e.g., procedures on the use of passwords, encryption, and reporting lost/stolen devices).

–     Provide specific procedures on security, retention, and protection of company data.

–     The employer should have reasonable access to the device for legitimate business purposes whenever needed (e.g., to retrieve work-related emails or documents for e-discovery).

–     Include reasonable protections for employees’ private data (e.g., the employer will make reasonable efforts to protect personal information) but disclaim the risk of data loss in the event of a security issue.

–     Consider having “routine” security and maintenance inspections.

–     Have a “security or remote wipe” provision that allows the employer to delete company data from the employee’s device at any time (e.g., upon termination).

–     Secure the employee’s consent to the policy and maintain a record of this consent.

–     The policy should be clear, complete, and readily available to employees.

–     Apply and enforce the policy consistently.

–     Recommendations: Supplement the policy with BYOD training.

•      Promote cooperation between the employee and the employer regarding the use, maintenance, and security of the employee’s device.

•      Identify potential problems and educate employees on workable solutions to these problems during training (e.g., procedures for lost/stolen devices and document retention in the event of litigation).

•      Have a framework in place to monitor employees’ adherence to the BYOD policy, and respond to questions or concerns as they occur.

•        Recommendation: A well-crafted policy and training program can prevent BYOD issues.

•      See, e.g., Sitton v. Print Direction, Inc., 718 S.E.2d 532, (Ga. App. 2011), (holding that employer was not liable to discharged employee for viewing and printing employee’s personal emails from employee’s personally owned laptop computer where at the time of the access, the computer was linked to employer’s network and company had a published and well-crafted computer usage policy that authorized the employer’s access under the circumstances presented).

Scott L. Vernick is a partner at Fox Rothschild LLP and a nationally ranked trial lawyer. He represents Fortune 500 companies in commercial litigation matters that focus on technology, intellectual property, health care, privacy and data security.