Fascinating to read that reputation de-toxing is now available for hapless celebs – or even ordinary mortals – whose online reputation has got a little out of control. But it does beg the question why corporate entities such as BP get slammed for similar proactive reputation management, for example its buying up of Google adwords ‘oil spill’, ‘volunteer’ and ‘claims’ which was reported in early June.
Could it be that celebrities only hurt themselves or those immediately around them when they do wrong, as opposed to a gaffe by multi billion pound business which usually impacts income, health or quality of life for tens, hundreds or thousands. Or is it that we simply feel corporate business is faceless or, in BP’s case, headed by people out of touch with the man earning a living fishing for seafood in the Gulf of Mexico?
But big business can do it right. Look at Richard Branson’s response to the 2007 Virgin rail crash – cutting short his holiday, appearing on the scene in his anorak within hours, praising the driver and rescue services, his press office becoming fully active within 90 minutes to offer information and spokespeople. He’s held up as the consummate professional in dealing with crises, and one can’t help but feel that if Virgin bought up Google search terms in an effort to manage its online reputation, this would be greeted in a different light.
Which all goes to suggest that in matters of online corporate reputation management, it’s not the action itself - it’s what goes before and after and around the action. Online reputation management is just a smaller subset of every action, word and nuance coming from an organisation or individual, which can then dramatically alter the context in which information is received. So in the words of Ella Fitzgerald and Fun Boy Three (depending on your era), managing reputation online ain’t so much what you do – it’s the way that you do it…
Nice one, Amy – pithy and considered, as ever!
I think the key here is ‘manipulation’. We all have an inherent dislike of being manipulated. I think Virgin actually *would* get away with buying up search terms because, in every other aspect of its operation and Branson’s public conduct, the term is not associated with the brand. There’s a huge resevoir of trust around the Virgin brand that would help offset any feeling of manipulation.
BP, however, has sought to manipulate public opinion over the Gulf spill from start to finish. From fudging the daily flow rate to doctoring images of its monitoring and response. The trust factor just isn’t there. Which brings us back to the point you make in your final par: “it’s what goes before and after and around the action.”
It should go without saying that respected brands erode their resevoirs of goodwill at their peril. But at least they have the option. The trick, as a PR professional, is to have the self-awareness and critical honesty to self of knowing when your brand can carry it off. And when it can’t.