Comments on: Online reputation management

By: Sam Farrow

Sam Farrow — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 20:03:38 +0000

At least Mencken would have come up with the idea himself.

The current cheer campaign is most likely based off this event in Bakersfield California back in 2005. The link is through to the LiveJournal community for Starbucks baristas. (via)

By: Jason Ryan

Jason Ryan — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 06:28:45 +0000

@Sam:

No-one ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public.
H.L. Mencken

@Leon: good point about response time Leon, engaging quickly can assist you to manage a crisis.

By: Leon Hudson

Leon Hudson — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 03:33:45 +0000

Reputation is the broad estimation in which your publics hold you, it is indeed an expression of trust. I agree that in general comparatively more effort should be directed towards offline reputation but it should be acknowledged that online reputation management is crucial as events (positive or negative) can unfold very quickly. In the words of KD Paine, “the words shared in the blogosphere are an important source of outtake information”.

By: Sam Farrow

Sam Farrow — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 20:03:19 +0000

My take on it is that reputation is a product of the degree of trust that your publics have in your agency.

Or in your coffee shop .

The worst astroturf of the year.

Starbucks may have eroded a lot of trust - but in their non-internet savy, soccer mom, demographic they have probably had significant cut through.

It’s so crude it makes me cringe.

By: Jason Ryan

Jason Ryan — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 23:17:23 +0000

Thanks infofreako. Your inference about the impact of social media on our workforce, and particularly around the issue of consent is a good one.

I don't see 'approved,' or for that matter 'independent,' agency bloggers, for example, having much of an effect as personalities (which is the traditional reputational and blogger model).

However, I do think that agencies that are prepared to engage using social media will increasingly be seen as more responsive, more effective and hence more trusted.

By: infofreako

infofreako — Sun, 16 Dec 2007 22:32:08 +0000

Reputations are not so much traded as conferred by association so individuals have the power to confer positive (or negative) cred to their organisations in a web 2.0 world through their online (and offline) activities.

This is because we tend to trust people who are recommended or trusted by people we already know and trust.

What is interesting here is the potential role of individuals in developing an organisational reputation - if we allow them to speak (and even if we don’t).

For sci-fi buffs, this is an interesting take on online reputation economies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whuffie