Statistics – Why a recruiter will not hire you after seeing your Facebook profile

When I set out to do my MA a couple of year ago, one of the main groups I had in mind when it comes to online trust and the consequences of actions online was my former students. My dear little 8 years old were 16 and starting to get on Facebook at the time I was researching. Now, those sweet little ones are 18 and have just left home and entered university life. I can imagine how photographing every moment seems so important as they make connections with new people, tag new friends, and show their old friends from high school just how much fun they are having away from home. Well, they arent thinking about how those photos may come back to haunt them.

Well, it's not just my students who should be worried, according to this chart, HRs are looking at social profiles and that can impact on the desirability of a job candidate. Right or wrong, people look.

I say up your privacy settings, be careful about what you are tagged in, but dont feel like you cant be you. Just know your audience.

 

Reppler
via Reppler.com

Mel Gibson, Lindsay Lohan... and you too. Why your reputation needs an online detox | Technology | The Observer

Mel Gibson, Lindsay Lohan... and you too. Why your reputation needs an online detox

A new breed of PR gurus is evolving to combat digital disaster areas

Lindsay Lohan surrenders at courthouse Actor Lindsay Lohan during a court appearance for probation violation in Beverly Hills last month is an obvious target for the reputation managers. Photograph: Al Seib/EPA

Haunted by a revealing photograph from your drink-mad office party posted on Facebook? Berated by an ex-lover on a blog posting? Or is your business being skewered online by a vindictive customer? Then Gary Powers is waiting to hear from you. He can help.

In the modern digital age where seemingly everything and everyone is online, a new industry is emerging to "manage" the internet footprint that people and businesses leave online. "Reputation managers" can clean up and shape a person's online history: burying the damaging stuff and promoting the good.

Given the numbers of famous people who arguably are in need of such a service, and the millions of others leaving an online footprint around the world every day, the potential market is dazzling.

Kate Moss is already rumoured to be using online brand reputation management to make sure Google searchers come to positive stories first. By contrast, due to recent online leakings of abusive rants about his ex-girlfriend, actor Mel Gibson's fourth result on a Google search is a negative gossip story.

The same goes for Paris Hilton, the socialite and heiress. The fifth result on a Google search for her brings up disputed claims that customs officers in Corsica had found marijuana in her purse and had briefly detained her. A good reputation manager might be able to push that story down Hilton's Google results chain. Lindsay Lohan, currently in jail, is famed for use of her Twitter account where she frequently sends out ill-advised updates. A reputation manager could help to suppress those Tweets or even try to get them deleted.

Powers, who works for a US company called ReputationDefender, is paid to help promote the positive, hide the negative and even have hostile internet postings removed altogether. Fees vary across the industry. For $15 (£9.50) a month, ReputationDefender will work with a client to clean up and monitor their internet reputation. They can also send you an alert whenever a new reference to your child is posted anywhere online. For $30, they will try to destroy hostile internet content. In 2008 the firm raised $2.6m in investment funding.

"We get people from all walks of life," said Powers, the company's "head writer". People who come to the firm for assistance range from professionals, like lawyers or doctors, to those involved in the entertainment industry; anyone who is concerned that someone, somewhere, might search for them online.

Increasingly the results of a Google search can affect the most important elements of people's lives. A recent Microsoft study showed that 78% of job recruiters conducted internet searches on their clients in order to check out their backgrounds. Experts say that the huge growth of the internet has in effect created a "permanent memory" online that can be searched by anyone. Embarrassing statements, and photographs, or angry attacks by spiteful ex-friends once faded away. But no longer. Anyone can be judged forever on a moment of madness or bad luck.

There are now many firms offering help in keeping people's online history safe. They include companies and websites like Online Reputation Manager, Reputation Professor and Reputation Management Partners. It is an industry that has arisen almost overnight. ReputationDefender was founded in 2006 and now employs dozens of people from its base in Redwood City, California. David Thompson, chief privacy officer at ReputationDefender, sees the sector as involved in an "arms race" with web developments that erode people's privacy. "If they are building a better gun, we are building a better bullet-proof vest," he said.

Some developments can be potentially scary. Facial recognition software will allow the internet to recognise – and make potentially searchable – any photograph in which someone appears, even if only in the background (say at a riot, protest or orgy). Experts warn that everything we do on the internet can be collected and collated digitally. All that information is tracked, gathered and used by marketers who then build up a detailed profile of the consumer.

Professor Joseph Turow, of the University of Pennsylvania, believes this "unknown reputation" that everyone has will eventually lead to people having very different experiences online. "People will be defined by marketers in ways they know nothing about, and this is a process that is getting bigger and bigger," Turow said.

Turow spoke in front of the US Senate last week appealing for government regulation. "Most people do not have a clue this is going on. They don't even know they have a reputation online that is being used in this way," Turow said.

Eventually, experts predict, millions will employ someone to manage the traces they leave, perhaps even those who work in reputation management.

Does Powers employ someone to manage his own online history? Not yet. Instead he cuts the problem off at the source, trying not to leave a trace in the first place. "I have a very low profile. I kind of like that," he said.

ReputationDefender assessed the online needs of our writer Paul Harris, left. Here is an edited extract of its verdict

Mr Harris has a significant opportunity to take control of his visibility in Google and to accelerate his career.

We found that the first page of a US Google search for "Paul Harris" has no mention of our Mr Harris; instead it is filled with information about a semi-pro basketball player, a magician, and the founder of the charitable Rotary Club. It took until the second page of Google to find a link to the Observer, and to the fourth page to find Mr Harris's book.

Searching Google for "Paul Harris Observer" found outdated political criticisms above Mr Harris's own writings. By allowing somebody else to have the first search result, Mr Harris allows other people to define him.

Mr Harris is losing valuable professional connections because he cannot be found online. More than 75% of all clicks are on the first three links in Google, and 90% of users don't look past the first page of results. Mr Harris's minimal presence in Google is not consistent with his brand as a journalist and author; many Google users associate highly visible authors with success.

We assume that Mr Harris would like his "Google resume" to reflect positively on his unique career in international journalism. He can build that brand by ensuring that a Google search brings up positive and relevant content like his Observer profile, some of his best articles, his book, and his author page.

We would next raise the profile of the links identified above so that they move to the top of a Google search for "Paul Harris" and related terms. A dedicated adviser can also provide other reputation management advice to Mr Harris based on a deeper understanding of his goals, such as suggesting the use of a middle initial to differentiate himself from [another] author, or could suggest ways to adjust Mr Harris's personal website to provide more powerful Google value.

• This article was amended on 3 August 2010 to correct the name of the reputation management company to ReputationDefender.

This article covers so many things...

I posted about ReputationDefender at some point in this bibliography of trust and online reputation, which I am not a huge fan of, but can certainly see why some high profile individuals or companies may need it. But in the name of transparency, I dont want some d-bag company to pay $30 and get their rep scrubbed.

I talked a lot about how Google becomes your resume throughout my MA, but the things that are within your control - perhaps you should think about it before you post it. It's all just common sense, right? If you're going to be kicking yourself down the road 1 hour, 1 week, 1 year down the road - then it's probably best to keep it to yourself.

I am totally fascinated about the facial recognition part, farther down in the article. Facebook is already using it to a certain extent. If it is true that our words, choices and uploads are going to eventually be "collected and collated digitally" to build up a "detailed profile" online for marketers to be able to specifically target us for products and whatever else...whoa. I have no doubt that it's coming.

Oh how things change...

In 10yrs time...

"In 10yrs time, kids will Google themselves and discover how often their media-exec parents used them as case-studies at tech conferences."
Quoted from Matt Locke's tweet. twitter.com

While I dont have kids, I have former students. They were 8 when I first taught them. They are 17 now. I am 'friends' on Facebook with many of them.

Yikes.

That's all I'm gonna say.

Is social media destroying trust in friends? | Blog | Econsultancy

Posted 09 February 2010 09:05am by Patricio Robles with 0 comments

Just as marketers increase their spending on social media marketing comes potentially discouraging news: consumers are trusting their friends a whole lot less.

According to AdAge, the 2010 Edelman Financial Services U.S. Trust Barometer found that only 25% of those surveyed considered friends and peers to be credible sources of information. That's down from 45% in 2008.

The findings are stirring up a lot of buzz for obvious reasons. One of the reasons that social media is finally coming into its own as a bona fide marketing medium, where companies can interact with consumers and influence them through their friends and peers. But if Edelman's findings are to be believed, friends and peers are just as prone to a crisis of confidence as the news media, for instance, which has also seen a precarious drop in trust according to Edelman.

That's bad news for social media.

Part of the problem: the volume of information being distributed and how fast it is distributed. AdAge quotes David Berkowitz of 360i, who notes that consumers are flooded with information on popular social media hangouts:

When you're seeing so much noise, it's very easy to dismiss a lot of it, and that's a problem marketing messages have had for a while now. If you use the live feed and have a few hundred friends, some kind of peer recommendation, whether it's explicit or not, appears every couple of minutes and sometimes they come in a matter of seconds. If you're seeing all of that come in, it can be overwhelming.

And it's not just volume. It's quality. As we see on a regular basis, the information that spreads through social media hubs isn't always reputable, and social media makes it easy to spread misinformation for fun and profit. At some point, individuals are likely to remind themselves of the old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

But for marketers, the problem of information overload and a poor signal-to-noise ratio isn't the biggest challenge. The biggest challenge is overcoming the fact that social media has been abused.

Lured by the prospect of sparking and controlling word-of-mouth, many marketers rushed into social media without thinking about the consequences of their strategies. From paid status updates to payola, one can be certain that a growing number of consumers are aware that their friends may be little more than corporate shills. In a day and age when someone will tweet a link for $50 or write a friendly blog post after being given some clothing, is it really any wonder that people are less trusting of their peers? Wouldn't it be more surprising if these things had no impact on trust?

While I'm sure Edelman's findings will be debated and even questioned, marketers should remind themselves of one fact: trust is earned. You can't co-opt a 'trustworthy' medium and expect to avoid this. Instead, you should take it as a greater incentive to use the medium wisely.

Photo credit: Hot Rod Homepage via Flickr.

Learn more...

Econsultancy's Social Media and Online PR Report examines how companies are using online PR tactics and social media sites such as Twitter for marketing and customer service. Econsultancy has also published Social Media and Online PR Template Files, which you can adapt and use for your own projects. For innovation in this space, download our Innovation Report.

Patricio Robles is a tech reporter at Econsultancy. Follow him on Twitter.

I can see the point where those of us who write reviews can be considered untrustworthy by our peers if we have been given free meals or drinks or products to try. I'm sure it would seem that our opinions can be bought. As someone on both sides of the table, I review but I also give things to others to review for clients, I can only hope that recommendations stay true to the writer/influencer. The point of peer recommendation is that it's based on trust. You call a friend for a movie review or suggestion of where to eat, and you trust that person to lead you in the right direction. If marketers tap into this resource and buy influence, it can ruin the trust between friends when the information the friend gives is no longer genuine.

Beware – Your Digital Footprint is Your Resume | Search Engine People Blog



So much fuss lately about our carbon footprints, but what about the digital footprints we leave. Think about this for a second … a great deal of what we do now appears online? I started thinking deeper about the implications of digital footprints earlier when I posted a piece from DailyBlogTips … titled "Put Honesty and Integrity Above Everything Else to Sphinn.

Footprints on the Beach

Consider for a second … I, or anyone for that matter, can tell a great deal about you from your digital footprints. If not careful, it might be possible to tell:
- where you've been
- where you are
- who you know
- where you work
- what your hobbies are
- what you think about certain issues
- and much more. In many cases, I can even tell what you look like. And the amount of information available about you is only going to grow.

Some of these footprints you choose to leave via blogs, forums, and so forth. Others however, you leave unintentionally (which I'll call toe-prints … from walking on your tippy-toes). This is kinda scary … much of it will remain online indefinitely.

To me, the scariest kind of footprints are the toe-prints. With the proliferation of mobile devices, and other information capturing equipment, we'll most certainly be faced with challenges we could not have comprehended only a few mere years ago. Our kids will have it even worse.

All this information, the footprints you choose to leave, and the toe-prints left unintentionally, conspire to tell a great deal about you as an individual.

But the ramifications are in fact even much deeper. HR departments, including our own, are using search engines and social media to research potential candidates. We're looking to:
a) validate what your actual resume said
b) learn more about you … in a non office environment
In effect, every job seeker of the future will be not unlike a political candidate. Hopefully their closets are squeaky clean, and if not, devise strategies to address it. At the same time, lack of footprint online is not good either … especially in the internet space.

So in conclusion, just be very careful to leave a clean footprint. Dust away to toe-prints where possible. And make sure the footprint matches your size.

I think I'm gonna get into the name change business. I'm pretty sure there will be a big boon in business for quite a number of years to come!

ReputationOnline » Blog Archive » Danny Whatmough on ‘Managing reputations’

Danny Whatmough on ‘Managing reputations’

Posted by Danny Whatmough
on 14th October 2009

trustI find politics fascinating, so I’ve been closely following the party conference season over the last few weeks.

Newsnight has been a big part of this and it was an interview between Jeremy Paxman and Boris Johnson on the show that really grabbed my attention. Not because of the colourful political jousting that went on (though it’s worth watching), but more Paxman’s accusation that because Cameron is a former ‘PR man’ he isn’t to be trusted.

This got me thinking: does the PR industry really have such a tarnished reputation? Is there such distrust of what we do and say?

Maybe the accusation is fair. After all, our role is to help brands – be they companies or individuals – come across in a positive light and certainly, especially in politics, there have been many underhand or distrustful methods used to achieve this goal.

But I think, despite what has or hasn’t happened in the past, change is coming (if you’ll excuse the political rhetoric): the internet is forcing PR to modify the way it does its work.

Online, consumer empowerment and democratisation, combined with the rise of social media, challenges brands to build more transparent and trustworthy relationships with those they seek to influence. Anyone that hopes to ’spin’ in our socially connected digital world, will be found out and there are already numerous examples of where this has happened.

The web has forced businesses to change their attitude to reputation management and embrace more open communication methods – focusing not on hiding or spinning the truth, but on building two-way, collaborative dialogues.

It was good to read last week that First Direct has announced a new microsite that will aggregate every mention of the brand online – good and bad – from more than 5m social media sites.

This is a good example of the transparent, ‘anti-spin’ strategy that online marketers should be employing as they try to open up access to brands and engage with their publics.

Forget the futile debates about who is best placed to manage social campaigns. Let’s continue to embrace this new way of communicating and begin to change the reputation from which our own industry seems to suffer.

Will David ‘the PR man’ Cameron be able to run an election campaign void of spin? Will the PR industry be able to redeem itself by embracing new communication methods in this digital age? Or am I just being too naive?

Danny Whatmough (@DannyWhatmough) is a PR Consultant at Wildfire. He blogs at DannyWhatmough.com and the Wildfire Blog.