Online Reputation Management Blog

How to Get a Positive Review Online

March 27, 2012 by 2 Comments

Reviews matter.  A 2011 online survey of 1,054 US adults by Cone revealed that 80% of respondents agreed with the statement: “Negative information I’ve read online has made me change my mind about purchasing a product or service recommended to me.” Besides knowing what’s being said about you online and responding, if appropriate, it’s also important to encourage your customers or clients to post positive reviews for you and your business.

Below you’ll find some tips on how to encourage positive reviews to boost your online reputation.

1. Ask happy customers. This might seem like a no-brainer, but it will also require more work on your part to ensure that you’re not broadcasting this information to those who are unhappy with you. Rather than posting a sign at your front desk or passing out fliers asking for online reviews, talk to your patients or customers individually. If you’re a medical professional, ask a patient with whom you’ve developed a great rapport over a series of visits, not someone who is visiting you for the first time. If you’re a business owner, ask a customer or client after they’ve told you what a great job you did. Thank them for the compliment, but tell them the best way to show their appreciation is to post a review.

2. Collect customer email addresses. If you’re still too shy to make the ask face-to-face, begin collecting the email addresses of your customers and clients. Just like in the previous example, keep track of who you’ve had a great experience with and ensure that they receive an email (and likewise, make sure that those who clearly were unhappy do not receive an email). Write a short email within a day or two of the last visit and be appreciative. Don’t send an email blast to your customer list at one time, review sites are skeptical about a sudden uptick in positive reviews and may refuse to publish reviews that look like they are part of a coordinated campaign.  For best results, send a couple of requests a day over a long period of time.

3. No pay to play. Providing incentives for a positive review are a no-no. Sites like TripAdvisor and Yelp.com have been known to delete comments when it’s clear the writer was given a financial incentive. Yelp.com also investigates when too many positive reviews are coming in from new users; this could end up being detrimental to your business since all of those great reviews will be deleted.

4. Show them where to go: Don’t make your customers do all the work. Easily direct them to the websites that you’d like them to use for their online review. This can be on a flier or in the email.

No matter what your business or profession, your clients and customers are familiar with online reviews (they may have even chosen you because of your online reviews) and how they impact your online reputation. If they are a happy customer, they will be more than willing to share their positive experience with others, all you have to do is ask!

Filed Under: online marketing, Online Reputation Management Tagged With: ,

Google Has All the Answers with Semantic Search Technology

March 19, 2012 by 3 Comments

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that Google is in the process of making dramatic changes to its search algorithm — the most significant changes in its history — by providing more direct answers to queries and using semantic technology to improve search accuracy.  According to early reports, Google has been trying for nearly two years to group data into three entities: people, places and things and how various keywords relate to each other.

So what does this mean for the future of search engine optimization and online reputation management?  Are title, tags and keywords out?  Will my linkbuilding fall down?

Not so fast.  The article suggests that Google’s semantic search technology will go beyond keyword-based data to pull expanded information from websites and share with users who are looking for exactly that information.  Smarter queries will yield better answers.  Makes sense to me.  So when you are looking for Steve Jobs, you won’t get an employment site by mistake.

In the process, I hope we don’t lose the spontaneity and flexibility of search for something too narrow, where everything reads like Quora or Wikipedia. Ask Jeeves got boring real fast.  I might be wondering when to set the DVR for the season premiere of Mad Men, but we also use the web to stumble across new music, videos, blogs and whatever Kim Kardashian is wearing.

The Google “announcement” may just be PR bluster.  The Wall Street Journal may be getting ahead of Google and Google may be getting ahead of itself.  There will be a continuing shift to higher quality content, but this is nothing new or groundbreaking.  Google Panda update penalized content farms and duplicate content aggregated on low-quality, ad-heavy sites.  But Google knows there’s still a lot of crap out there and the changes suggested by the article herald further improvements coming very soon to a computer near you.

If Google is able to move past the traditional 10 results on the page for a more targeted web experience, it will be a gamechanger for the reputation management and SEO industry.  But something tells me we’ll still be pretty busy getting our clients to keep their people, places and things straight.

Filed Under: Google Tagged With: , , ,

Is Employer Access to Facebook and Twitter an Invasion of Privacy?

March 14, 2012 by 3 Comments

It’s common knowledge that colleges, employers and potential dates are checking you out on Facebook and Twitter.  In response, you’ve probably taken every opportunity to batten down the hatches from unwanted social media snooping by parents, coworkers, employers and your ex, painstakingly reading the fine print each time Facebook makes a privacy update.  Last week, MSNBC reported that some colleges and employers, frustrated that they can no longer use public profiles on these sites to “stalk” their applicants, are actually requesting full access — even private pages — on social media sites so they can monitor every status update, tweet and embarrassing picture you post.

One employer, Maryland state’s Department of Corrections, doesn’t request the passwords anymore (the ACLU put a stop to that), but asks that the applicant log in to Facebook during the interview and click through the site while the interviewer watches.  This is voluntary, but applicants are submitting to it for fear that not doing so would cost them the job.

Another group facing restrictions are student-athletes.  Many colleges, like the University of North Carolina, request that a designated coach/administrator on each sports team has access to the athletes’ social networking page.

The reasoning behind these two examples is probably understandable: the employer doesn’t want to risk hiring anyone with gang affiliations, and the school wants to ensure their athletes are adhering to the student-athlete conduct code.  But where is the line drawn when it comes to requesting access to an private and personal information?  Is email access far behind?  Or, as one attorney in the MSNBC article notes, will employers ask to “bug” our homes?

According to the article, Maryland has begun proposing laws prohibiting employers from asking for passwords; Illinois is considering similar legislation.  However, the responsibility ultimately resides within each of us who use social media.  Thanks to our Constitution, we all enjoy free speech.  But we don’t need to say everything that pops into our heads or show pictures of every private moment.  Even when using the highest privacy settings available, it’s important to use social media responsibly.  Unless of course, you don’t mind your boss looking at your honeymoon pictures or girlfriend’s late night status updates…

What do you think?

Is it wrong for employers or prospective employers to request access to your personal social media pages?

Filed Under: Facebook, Privacy, Twitter Tagged With: , , ,

Lessons from Limbaugh

March 8, 2012 by 3 Comments

An apology has a period at the end of the sentence.  Rush Limbaugh made a lot of mistakes over the past week.  His second biggest mistake was that he forgot the period.  Apologies are funny things.  If you don’t do it right, it just doesn’t count.  Ask anyone who has ever been married or in a relationship.  As a guy, I take it for granted that I’m usually wrong.  It’s just the way it is.  I have two choices.  I can either admit it now, or I’ll admit it later.  And it’s always more painful later.

When Rush Limbaugh came out last week and described Sandra Fluke as a “slut” and “prostitute” she, and the rest of America, was expecting an apology.

On Saturday March 3rd, Rush issued a written statement:

“For over 20 years, I have illustrated the absurd with absurdity, three hours a day, five days a week.  In this instance, I chose the wrong words in my analogy of the situation.  I did not mean a personal attack on Ms. Fluke.”  And later Rush concluded, “[m]y choice of words was not the best, and in the attempt to be humorous, I created a national stir.  I sincerely apologize to Ms. Fluke for the insulting word choices.”

Rush forgot the period.  He apologized for his choice of words, but kept right on talking, trying and ultimately failing to explain away his remarks.  By saying “[m]y choice of words was not the best,” Rush missed the perfect opportunity to say: “My choice of words was hurtful and wrong.  I’m sorry.”  Rush lost the chance to personally and publicly recognize the emotional impact of his powerful voice.  By concentrating on those two words, Rush also failed to take responsibility for the other insensitive comments he made regarding Sandra Fluke’s sex life.

A crucial element in any successful apology is to recognize the pain or hurt your actions cause another.  It is from this personal connection that an apology can transform words that hurt into words that heal.

Shortly after the firestorm that erupted in 2007 when shock-jock Don Imus called the Rutgers women’s basketball team “nappy-headed hos.”  Imus issued a straightforward, unequivocal apology.

“I want to take a moment to apologize for an insensitive and ill-conceived remark we made the other morning regarding the Rutgers women’s basketball team, which lost to Tennessee in the NCAA championship game on Tuesday.  It was completely inappropriate and we can understand why people were offended.  Our characterization was thoughtless and stupid, and we are sorry.”

Imus did more than just say he was sorry.  Imus expressed sincere remorse and contrition.  After he was ultimately fired and his show cancelled, Imus followed through on a prearranged meeting with the Rutgers coach and basketball team to apologize in person.  For cynics who might claim Imus was simply trying to salvage his career and reputation, it is worth noting that when he went to the New Jersey Governor’s mansion to meet the coach and her team, Imus wasn’t standing at a podium or behind a microphone.  His apology wasn’t delivered at a media conference or via press release.  It was unscripted and there were no lawyers or cameras.  It was personal and private.  And it was accepted.

Apologies are hard.  Sometimes pride gets in the way.  You often get one chance to say “I’m sorry.”  Rush got three and struck out swinging.  He kept on talking, explaining, trying to defend himself and he looked weaker each time he opened his mouth.   Rush just needed to say “I’m sorry.”  End of sentence.

When you’re making an apology, don’t forget the period.

Filed Under: crisis communications, Privacy, reputation management Tagged With: ,
« Previous Page
Next Page »