Reputation Management Online

Television, radio, newspapers and the internet. Which is the odd one out? The internet, for as Monday proved – it’s the one thing that can’t be controlled by a court-issued super-injunction. One can’t help but feel bad for Jemima Khan, who this week held an awful lot of limelight and felt the full force of social media scrutiny. And now, thanks to the mockery Twitter made of the British judicial system, privacy laws are facing review according to UK ministers.

In the small hours of Monday morning, a twitter user made a series of posts claiming to have insider knowledge about a collection of super-injunctions (those new-fangled gagging orders which stop the press commenting on either the existence, or contents, of a superinjunction) and it took the internet like wildfire. Caught up in the center of this was socialite Jemima Khan who, as the Twitter poster at #injunctionsuper claimed, was named as part of an extra-marital affair with BBC’s Top Gear host Jeremy Clarkson.

While people were left reeling from the possibility of pictures that exist of Jeremy Clarkson being intimate with anyone (let alone Jemima Khan), the affair has since been denounced as pure fabrication. Despite this, it still caught the nation’s attention as the Twitter posts were referred to (but not quoted, you know – due to the SI’s) as the story was picked up by television, radio and newspapers up and down the country. Khan took to Twitter herself to refute the stories, and pleaded for people to stop sending her threatening and unpleasant ‘tweets’.

A certain footballer was also named as the footballer who took out a superinjunction to keep stories of him having an affair with a model a secret. And unfortunately for him, whilst the UK media wasn’t allowed to comment due to the gagging order, it was confirmed by a Spanish sports news publication that doesn’t fall under the jurisdiction of the British courts. You know, being from Spain and all.

Both instances prove examples to the potential for social networking sites such as Twitter to have massive and immediate impact on reputation; irrespective of accuracy. The reason this particular episode has gained so much attention is due to the legal ramifications involved, but that’s not to say that the internet can’t be a vessel for disruption on less high-profile cases. Often due to the sheer volume of news and column sites available online, it can be difficult to muzzle independent reports and accusations and it’s easy to lose control over content flow being afforded to the casual observer.

With the exception of the handful of 24-hour news channels available in the UK, news (save for nationally prevalent broadcasts) comes on at fixed times. Radio stations have dedicated news presenters that have fixed slots and report the news at predesignated intervals. And most newspapers come out once a day; in the morning. The internet, on the other hand, works in ‘real time’. The moment somebody’s finished writing something it can be seen online. If derogatory comments and claims are made on the ‘real-time web’, it wont be long before it becomes global. As such, it’s imperative to set up provisions for handling such outbreaks of negative publicity, or at least know where to look for help once it’s happened.

Take a look at our home page for ways in which we can help stem negative content published online, or stay tuned for our upcoming feature article on the top 10 do’s and do not’s of online reputation management.

Related posts:

1. Cesc Fabregas the Latest in Twitter Controversy In an era whereby the mainstream media is overpopulated by...
2. Twitter Zeitgeist Research showing the lack of correlation between twitter hot words...
3. Sally Bercow gr8 example of twitter personal or twitter work Mrs Bercow Twittered  EyeSpyMP “I am not an MP. I...
4. Stephen Fry Pledges Prison Over Twitter Joke Twitter and other social networking sites have the potential to...
5. #Injunctionsuper goes global Twitter has outed the celebrities who have taken out super...