enter the fray: our reader discussion forum
Search in:
Advanced
View:FlatThreaded
Sage advice, Jack.
by GeneralDisarray

You're right - one's online reputation doesn't belong to that person any more than their offline reputation ever did.

The most effective tool one can employ to impact public perception is (or counteract misperception) is proactive impression management. This is even true in cases of slander and libel, the only difference being the arena in which those misperceptions are countered.

It seems sort of ridiculous to assert that Google has some obligation to correct public perception. Google reflects opinion (and, to be fair, may perpetuate it), but it does no create it.

If someone has developed a misapprehension about you, either individually or collectively, then it is incumbent on you to correct it.


Re: Sage advice, Jack.
by Jon Garfunkel
Sure, but how much do "ordinary folks" know about SEO to affect the Google rankings? I took as the assumption for my investigation, not much. It takes a number of clicks off the Google search results page to directly learn what you could do to affect the rankings.
Yeah, ok.
by GeneralDisarray

Jon Garfunkel:
Sure, but how much do "ordinary folks" know about SEO to affect the Google rankings? I took as the assumption for my investigation, not much. It takes a number of clicks off the Google search results page to directly learn what you could do to affect the rankings.

But how much do ordinary folks know about any other form of impression management?

The internet is nothing more than another communication forum which, unlike many other media, you actually have the ability to impact rather directly. While it might take a little investigative work to determine how to do this, if someone is sophisticated enough to google their name, they're sophisticated enough to google something as brainless as "manipulating page ranking in google" [which I just did, and certainly provides ample fodder to go off and do a little learning and tinkering].

In college, I was routinely searching the cd-rom based databases. They're static. At least Google is amenable to direct influence. In fact, I'd argue it's a lot more amenable to influence than, say, the opinions of one's professional colleagues, at least in temporal terms.

Frankly, there are about 10 bajillion bloggers out there who are figuring this all out for themselves (and are often enough writing about it). If they can do it, about anyone can do it.

Of course, we don't all have a Jack Shafer giving us a huge boost, but it's always been nice to have high profile, influential friends - especially when they've got a megaphone like Jack's.

What else is new?

View as RSS news feed in XML