Information, news, allegations, innuendo - all traveling at warp speed.
People everywhere are linked, communicating and deliberating with hyper-connectivity.
So how does business stay in control? By recalibrating the corporation’s sense of reputation and using those same communications technologies to its advantage.
RepuMetrix Inc. recognized that access to precision Web searching of real-time news and information intelligence drives informed business decisions.
As a result, RepuMetrix has pioneered a suite of trademarked search services that is based on an advanced framework of Web tools developed exclusively to serve business sector interests.
Already, RepuMetrix products and solutions are trusted by growing number of organizations and professional sectors.
To find out more about our search intelligence technology, products or services, feel free to contact us anytime.
Categories: Opinion, 545 wordsSend feedback • Permalink
The Truths and Myths of using Google News for Online Reputation Monitoring and Management (ORM) as noted in a blog post on Marketing Pilgrim, explores the practical uses for folks who use Google to monitor and repair reputations. The realization of any/all limitations of available ORM tools starts with posts like these. I wanted to use these posts as a footnote to inform further discussion here on our blog.
Fundamental to the success of your ORM strategy means staying on top of the "buzz creep" - this means tracking every incident of online mention of your company name, your staff, brands, products/services, etc. - before if finds you. Using news alerts to monitor your reputation can work if you use it strictly as a monitoring barometer to help understand i) the timeline and delivery of incident details to the inboxes of Web audiences, and; ii) tracking how quickly the news can impact any rise or drop on first page Web search results.
The main drawback to solely using news alerts as an ORM strategy (a point that seems obvious to many of us, but one that can never be overstated) is that they don't cover the entire online terrain. Our experiences suggest that Web audience approval or disenchantment occurs most in places where debate on an issue or topic has the most potential to flourish and involve input, and although mainstream media has taken significant steps in recent years to allow input on news articles and stories, the content controls are a major reason why discussion and debate continues to happen elsewhere.
Another important consideration is that mainstream media, intentionally or not, has historically excluded some of the groups and associations most actively involved in using online environments to carry their message. For example, environmental groups may choose online communications because it allows them a control over the theme and message of their initiative - a control mechanism that is far less achievable in mainstream media coverage that would sooner point out the consequences of the groups actions (past or present) than focus on the message and relevance of their cause.
Taking this example one step further, like it or not, the debate to determine whether a newly launched campaign is 'eco-chic' or an eco-sham will be settled by the Web audiences, and the choice of where to debate the issue could find fertile ground on a MySpace blog maintained by a member of the activist group, and may eventually even make its rounds to a MySpace group or forum discussion. Whether or not those discussions transpire into any planned action outside your commercial establishment, our experiences inform us that using news alerts for ORM will mean you will only be apprised of the situation after it has happened.
As well, when we are speaking of online attention that can make or break a brand, keeping an eye on discussions that may lead to a planned protest are more likely to happen on a blog, a message board/forum, or social network site. The most striking evidence of this phenomenon is the little mainstream coverage received by the recent Energy Action Coalition's Fossil Fools Day initiative. For this reason and many others, ORM strategies must go beyond vanity searches, news alerts or a collection of feeds.
Categories: Opinion, 256 wordsSend feedback • Permalink
The "Free" vs. "Paid" Tools Debate
In recent months, reputation monitoring has definitely become a hot blogging topic. Some have been announcements welcoming new monitoring tools to the category. Others have been serving as advisories or tips to help business small or large get on board with managing their online identities.
Although most are in favour and understand the need for reputation monitoring, it seems that the "free tools" vs. "paid tools" debate has made its rounds (either introduced by the blog author or in the follow-up comments), and its a debate which I've been watching with some interest for at least as long as we've been offering our RepuTrace™ service.
My bias is quite clear and I've made it apparent in numerous blog posts as well as any opportunity I've had with mainstream media coverage. As I see it, it can be summed up into an advantage where automated software, human insight, core competence and best practices save business the precious time to compile, store and report on any and all online views that can make or break a brand. Timely reporting and precision monitoring that in my opinion greatly enhances the reputation management strategies of any business, small or large.
As far as reputation management strategies are concerned, because there is no comprehensive and all encompassing “how-to” guide to manage your reputation and brand online, my advice would always be to call in firms like ours to continue on a company's brand success, especially if you are realizing that free tools aren’t enough.
Categories: Announcements [A], 202 wordsSend feedback • Permalink
Over the past two years, CoreX has developed a reputation as being a leading provider of solutions designed to assist businesses in the areas of brand and reputation monitoring, investigations, competitive intelligence, market research, counterfeit brand protection and helping businesses preempt online threats.
Commencing August 1st 2007, and as part of an overall re-branding strategy, CoreX will officially become RepuMetrix.
With this announcement, we are committed in continuing to provide all our clients with the same level of service they have come to expect. That means providing them with leading-edge Internet monitoring solutions, and assisting them by keeping up on developments that affect their company – and their industries – with timely retrieval of intelligence from Web sites, blogs, chat rooms, social networks, video and media worldwide.
We are very excited about this re-branding strategy, and we believe it to be an integral part of staying ahead of the complicated, exciting and ever-changing Web, while continuing to build on our position of technological strength and our product and service offerings.
Building new relationships has always been an important part of our business philosophy and we encourage all questions and comments – leave us a comment or send us an email. We want to hear from you!
Categories: Opinion, 56 wordsSend feedback • Permalink
Online Reputation Management: What You Need to Know
"Online reputation management can ensure the ongoing success of your brand and your organization."
The Need for Reputation Management Increases Across the Web
"If you and your business have already suffered loss from bad online reputation, there is no time to wait. Contact a reputation management professional immediately."
Categories: Opinion, 357 wordsSend feedback • Permalink
The article references the PennWell ruling where precedence was seemingly set for an employer to claim ‘ownership’ over contact lists produced by a former employee during working hours.
From the article, Catrin Turner had the following to say on the case:
"The basic law is that if you create copyright material, something you write or type into a computer, you take photographs, you do cartoons, you potentially create film, if that is created in the course of your employment then the assumption is that that belongs to your employer, so that doesn't have to be written down by your employer."
What are the implications of this ruling when we look at the relationships and reputations we've built in different online environments? Is it possible that relationships and contact lists which are formed on Facebook or MySpace, and the profile itself can become an employers property? On this issue, Catrin Turner goes on to say:
...social networking sites and the material a person creates for them do not exist in a vacuum, that they do interact with working life, but that most users do not realise this.
"They may think that social networking is something which doesn't affect their work relationship, but it certainly does."
In a past post, I've discussed the more complex issues facing corporations as they relate to breaches of confidentiality which can occur when key company data walks out the door. In the Pennwell case and as Catrin Turner points out in the Out-Law.com article, this data can include contact lists and any relationships we form during our term of employment.
We may now have even greater reason for business to develop specific policies and private social networking infrastructure to keep business and personal activities separate. Not only when it relates to the standpoint of productivity, but in light of the Pennwell precedence, an even more convincing argument can now be made for employees to engage in any Facebook related activity only on free time.