Questions About Using a Site? Check Google

I came across two different articles today commenting on the trustworthiness of websites based on opinions the author's formed after Googling the company / owner's name. This one from SFGate.com talks about new online bid tool BidRate.com and some of the questionable aspects of the website (a lot of the properties have the same name and the CEO has 2 different last names).

At the end of the article, the author states that a Google search was performed on the CEO and 3 things are mentioned - that he's listed as 29 years old, that he has pictures of 'hot' ladies on the space, and some quote is pulled from his wall that alludes to him being unethical ("If the Facts Don't Fit the Theory ... Change the Facts").

What is the author saying here? The guy is a partying youngster who likes to bend the rules, and more importantly, to stay away from BidRent.com. It's crazy how more and more of these instances keep appearing that show that people will Google the name of any company or person that they come into contact with, just to do a little "background check". I admit it - I do it all the time. I even Google incoming calls if I don't recognize the number.

It just goes to show how everyone that has a name, whether you are an individual or a company, must be aware of the effect your online footprint is having on you every day. Take notice of the top 10 results in the major search engines and become active in influencing them. Hire a Reputation Management firm if you have to - but take this seriously, your online reputation is MORE important than your word-of-mouth reputation. Anyone can Google you at any time to take a peek.

Online Reputation Management and SEO Help

If you're looking for help managing your online reputation, visit the experts at Plus1 Media. For more information on search engine optimization, EnviSEO is a nice start.

Voltron Reputation - Defender of the Universe.com

A new start-up company called Reputation Defender caught my attention today. They are a repuation management firm that is set on catering to the average student and / or adult who may be applying for jobs, monitoring their kids, dating online and the like. Reputation Defender's clients will likely be fairly easy to manage online, low-profile clients will generally only need a moderate amount of monitoring and will probably only have information running on them on the standard social media/UGC sites. So, good luck Reputation Defender, I'm sure you'll be successful.

The post at SearchViews that mentions the start-up had some good insights into the growing online reputation management industry. First and foremost, it is growing, and at a rapid pace. Now is the time where this concept is spreading into the mainstream, and many companies will soon find different niches and methodologies to employ to profit from it (they will also be providing a needed service of course). The post also talks about how software that effectively can monitor the loads of information out on the web for relevant personal data, with a highlight on user-generated content, will be a huge step forward for the company or companies that develop it.

There are already some out there who have similar products, but it will be interesting to see who takes off and what niches they break into . . . . will it be the average Joe (like with Reputation Defender), the celebrity, the sports stars, the politicians, the corporations? The list can go on and on. In reality, everyone and everything has a repuation, and those reputations are now online. I'd expect to see many more companies popping up in the near future.

But what is the best way to effectively manage an online reputation? Is it by contacting the site owners, the people operating the site that is showing undesirable or untruthful information about you and demading its removal? I don't personally think that's the best way to go about things. At least not as an initial approach. Online reputations should be planned out, practiced, and managed. You can accomplish that by creating and optimizing positive websites regarding your name our brand. You can have a low-budget PPC campaign going as well. Send out a press release, contribute frequently to a blog, get friends to post a page about you, etc. Get the information that you want people to see / read about you on the web, and practice good SEO techniques to ensure that's what they'll see. I think the startup that provides that to the industry will be more effective than a search and destroy outfit.

The more you plan ahead, the more you take time to create a good reputation for yourself, the less time and money you'll need to spend in the future to combat negative information. Combining that with simply realizing that the information you put out on the web can always find a way back to you will go a long way with most people's online reputations. The big corporations and the politicians of the world will always need some sort of PR / spin control in the online forum, just like they do in all forms of media, but the average individual? I think not. Hopefully the continued rise of the idea of even having an "online reputation" will lead to greater awareness about what it is and what it can mean for people and companies.

SEOMoz on ORM for Politicians

Not much to report this week as far as online rep management goes, but I did catch a cool post on SEOMoz about reputation management and politics. It definitely seems to be catching some steam (as I have mentioned on here previously). There are some good comments left by people in the SEO industry on the SEOMoz post - apparently many of them are a bit averse to jumping into the lovely world of politics. I for one look at it like an opportunity to take on a leading role in an area of SEO that has barely been explored. Plus, it's kinda exciting isn't it? More fun than blue widgets and AdSense publishing. Enjoy your mom's basement (or the large house you now live in thanks to SEO) you goddamn nerds!

This will undoubtedly be the last election we see in America where growing, fostering, and protecting their online reputation is not something that our politicians concern themsevles with. Much like the way that print, radio and TV all had their dawning in this realm, the internet, and more specifically the search engines, are coming to the battlefront come 2008.

Why Political Bloggers Will Control the Electoral College in '08

Political blogs are a new medium that may have a significant effect on the upcoming Presidential election in 2008. Blogs started out as personal online journals. In the years prior to the last presidential election, blogs dedicated to politics began to appear. As the popularity increased, the writing began to be used as another tool in politics.

Recently, political blogs have become one of the most popular types on the internet. Most link to articles and add comments to support the bloggers position on an issue or about a particular candidate. They link to sources that can back up the position of the blogger with information or relevant statistics.

As blogs have become more mainstream, traditional media outlets have taken notice. News services and reporters have begun blogging. Political consultants now write blogs about political issues on a regular basis. Large group blogs such as The Huffington Post and the RedBlueBlog have cropped up with writings by many bloggers on one site. Politicians of both parties guest blog on these sites.

Candidates first used political blogs in the 2004 elections. Both John Kerry and George W. Bush had blogs on their websites. In the primary elections, Howard Dean and Wesley Clark were both blogging. Dean used blogs and his website successfully for fund raising. These candidates understood that this is an effective way to reach voters who may not be watching cable or network news. Younger voters may not be watching, but they are reading.

The 2004 South Dakota senate race was influenced, in part, by local blogs devoted to politics. Two well known bloggers routinely wrote favorably of the Republican candidate, John Thune. They also campaigned against Tom Daschle, the Democratic incumbent. Daschle was the leading Democrat in Congress, but lost his seat in that election. Later it was discovered that the two bloggers were paid by Thune’s campaign.

Blogs were initially seen as nothing more than partisan gossip, but are gaining credibility. Occasionally, bloggers actually break a story before the mainstream media. An example of this is the now infamous comments made by Senator Trent Lott about Strom Thurmond. Lott said that the country would have been better off if Thurmond had won the presidency in 1948.

Since Thurmond had campaigned on an anti-desegregation platform, this was perfect fodder for bloggers. Some began to investigate and found other interviews and documents to show the racism beneath the comment. Once the bloggers broke the story, the mainstream media picked it up. This eventually led to charges of racism and Lott eventually stepped down as Majority Leader.

Reading political blogs has benefits for voters, especially those who are undecided. Prior to the explosion in blogging, the undecided voter had to rely on debates between the candidates and information from the mainstream media to make a decision. The evening news too often resorts to sound bites when reporting on candidates. This can make it difficult to weigh the issues and differences between candidates. Reading a variety of political blogs from both parties can help crystallize the issues and decision making for the voter.

Both positive and negative implications exist for politicians - there is the benefit of a broader audience, spreading the word to more and more people. But that isn't always a good thing. Every time a candidate or politician makes a mistake or a bad decision, the bloggers will be there to record it. This has been a problem for George W. Bush during his presidency (one of them at least). Bad decisions and inaccurate statements he has made have been given more attention than they would have before the advent of political blogs.

The accuracy and integrity of political blogs continues to come under fire. Both parties accuse the other of using these writings to damage the credibility of the candidate’s opponent. This is a valid complaint and happens on both sides. It can be difficult for the voter to get an unbiased look at the candidates by reading blogs. It’s important to evaluate the source when relying on the information given.

Voters can expect more situations like the South Dakota senate race in upcoming elections. Politicians have learned the power of blogs and will be more likely to use this to their advantage in the 2008 election cycle. The parties will use blogs in the upcoming election, particularly in battleground states that can impact the Electoral College and therefore, the presidency.

In actuality, it remains to be seen how much influence bloggers will actually have on the 2008 and future elections, but it is likely to be a notable one. As interest in these writings continues to grow, they seem poised to have an impact.

reputation management

A Rep Management Trick

Somebody post something bad about you (or your company) on a forum or a blog? Hey, it can happen to the best of us. Chances are, if you are anyone or do anything worth talking about, someone will have something negative to say about you. And in the lovely cyberworld we live in, chances are it will also be showing up in a SERP near you.

Well here's a trick that can help remedy the situation (in most cases at least), and repair your online reputation in the process. The key to this trick is whether or not this negative post was done on a forum or a blog that offers the ability to leave 'comments'. Of course all forums allow people to participate in the discussion, and most blogs do too, so there's a good chance this will apply to your situation. Here's what you do:

1. Respond to the negative post by leaving a comment of your own on the same forum or blog, but on a different page. Include your full name (or company name) in the post.
2. Have a friend reply to your post.
3. Reply to your friend's post and include your full name (or company name) again.
4. Repeat this one more time on a different page within the forum or blog - not the negative post and not the one you just did, but a 3rd page.
5. Tag the 2 new pages that contain your name / company name and also point a few links to them (either place them on your own site or ask a friend).

Within a short time, the negative result that was previously showing up in the SERPs should be replaced by the new pages you have affected change on. Since Google (and those other guys that don't really matter) only will index 2 pages at most from a given domain in their top results, the new pages should replace the negative page.

Granted, there are instances where search engines index more than 2 pages (snippet links, https, etc.), but in general this should work. Especially on blogs and forums. It's worth a shot, and I've seen it work numerous times before. Happy manipulating.

Who is Less Trustworthy - Politicians or Bloggers?

In a time when people are consciously participating and relying more and more on the internet, in partiular blogs, as their one-stop source for political news, opinions, and goings-on, who are we putting our trust in? While there's no doubt that the general population takes the words that come out of a politician's mouth with a grain of salt, what about the pundits of Web 2.0?

Bloggers most typically obtain their 'facts' from mainstream media sources like newspapers (tangible or online), TV, and the net. They then offer up their own personal take on a given politician or issue, applying whatever biases or party-alignments they may have. And whether they are doing this conciously or unconciously (and whether you believe they may be biased or not), it still is just a single person sitting at a keyboard, as far removed from the inner-workings of American politics as the everyman.

Political bloggers may be absent a political agenda, but personal biases and unique life situations are definitely traits they share - just like all of us. Looking to them as an authoritative source of information thus may not be the best thing to do before making a decision on who you will vote for in the coming mid-terms, or further down the road in '08. The internet has given everyone a voice, and as we turn our eyes away from the negative television commercials to the free-wheeling op-ed postings of our favorite blogs, remember that the new media wave of the future probably isn't coming equipped with a heightened level of credibility.

Time will pass, and politicians and their consultants will become more aware of the power of the net to pursuade people. Their .com efforts will begin to increasingly crowd out the large search engine hugfest between political blogs/UGC and Google and Yahoo, and I'm not saying it's a bad thing. You may just end up having to dig a little further to find your favorite source of bullshit, cause Mr. Politician will be feeding you just as fast as Joe Blogger.

In the end, it's still on us to decide who to trust and what to trust. Just remember that while bloggers still have a stranglehold on the political web forum, they did not obtain it through years of service in politics, and thier words are as open for debate as the men and women they critique.