The article linked below is actually from a Middle Eastern news source. It seems as if international reputation management has that name for a reason. The author urges businessesmen that read the column to utilize international reputation management services to their benefit.

A strong corporate reputation generates confidence, in the present as well as in the future. It generates a feeling that the corporation is in the hands of safe and responsible leaders. And that is what matters.

The author is obviously right. Reputation matters, that is why companies spend billions on advertising each year. However, online reputation is becoming increasingly important relative to all other ways of creating or maintaining the company’s reputation.

http://www.ameinfo.com/56895.html

Google is constantly making changes that effect the reputation management services industry. This keeps professionals in that industry on their toes as well as refines and reforms the ways in which Google’s system for searching. However, these changes often make it easier for misanthropes, disgruntled employees, and underhanded competitors to damage your reputation. Google’s latest change has been to compile reviews about businesses from all over the Internet, including newspapers and blog posts. This will decentralize the reviewing process for Google, commentator Mike Blumenthal gives his analysis at the link below.

“By expanding the sites from which reviews are gathered and expanding the pools of reviews, Google will be able to aggregate this sort of information about many more places. It could very well portend a shift in the review landscape, moving power way from centralized review sites towards active and aggressive hyperlocal sites,” Blumenthal concludes.

The reputation management industry experiences shifts in the search formula and review process constantly, but this could be a dramatic change to how reputations are maintained online.

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Google-Now-Includes-Place-Pages-Reviews-from-Non-Traditional-Sources-132411.shtml

Virtually everyone can agree that Tiger Woods was wrong in what he did, and wrong in how he handled the entire accident/affair ordeal. Certainly there has been a news-storm surrounding the events that has done irreparable damage to both his social reputation and his internet reputation. The article linked below posts some numbers about search results and news stories–but the fact is that his search results, which were sparkly-clean before, now look awful and reflect a major mistake. This is the perfect example of someone who will eventually be in need of online reputation management–once he has apologized for his actions and gotten back to the daily golf grind. His search results will still reflect his negative actions, but they shouldn’t have to after he has apologized.

http://www.themeasurementstandard.com/issues/11-1-09/repsaved11-1-09.asp

There is a lot of content on the Internet that is laughable, that is fun, that is silly. Like all pranks, though, there is a point at which it stops being funny and becomes quite serious. This is true online too. When pranksters decide to take aim at companies and individual’s reputations, by gaming search engines, it is much more serious. A man or woman’s reputation is something that they must live with, whether it has been acquired fairly or unfairly, through lies or truth.

Companies can lose hundreds or thousands of possible clients from vicious lies spread on the web that find their way into search results. This can directly counteract the hundreds, thousands, or even millions of dollars that these companies spend on advertising to attract additional clients.

The only way to defend against this sort of anonymous online slander is to hire an online reputation management firm. ReputationHawk.com is the website of a company that helps to repair the injured reputations of individuals and companies. They do this by de-emphasizing the negative comments and replacing those links with more positive articles or blog postings.

Everything that I have read about this company says that they are very successful at what they do. Customer reviews, interviews, blog posts—all have sung the praises of Reputation Hawk. The Chicago Tribune, NewsWeek, Businessweek, and Time have all featured the innovative company in profiles of the industry or direct interviews.

All of the suggestions in the article linked below are great–and they work well. However, most search engine reputation management firms are capable of doing far more than any individual can by himself. Furthermore, since this is what they do for a living, they can devote far more time to it. They are also likely to have developed proven strategies to help push down negative websites.
http://www.marketingpilgrim.com/2007/10/google-reputation-management.html

Is it alright to bury consumer reports that might help a consumer to avoid giving money to a business that will not deliver a product as promised? Internet defamation has become a serious problem online, but is it ethical? The answer that I would give is quite simple: Every company has a right to respond to critics and publicize themselves in a way that is positive.
http://redtape.msnbc.com/2007/09/most-savvy-cons.html

This healthcare company tried to encourage their employees to use Facebook to spread the good word about their successful projects. Wisely, many employees chose not to because of the well-known privacy restrictions that are placed upon them–they did not want to share information that might be considered sensitive on a social networking site. In the age of online reputation management strategies, news of any mess-ups would get out quick and do incredible damage to the image of the company.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2009/10/19/urnidgns002570F3005978D885257654005AB2F6.DTL

This guy is completely right to defend the idea of online reputation management–regardless of whether his particular arguments or right. I’ll leave you, the reader, to decide whether his arguments are cogent or not–but I think everyone can agree that reputation is of immense importance. Many businesses and individuals who have suffered from internet libel will agree when I say, I’m glad the industry of online reputation management exists.
http://tonyadam.com/blog/online-reputation-management-does-matter/

There is a longstanding debate amongst critics and proponents of reputation management services as to whether it is has a net positive or net negatvie effect on the Internet and society. Whilse some allege that these services are “gaming the system”, I would contend that people have every right to publicize themselves in a way that is flattering, or at least not demeaning. To the question “is it ethical?”, I would respond “is it ethical to advertise on TV and radio?”
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9060960/Online_reputation_management_is_hot_but_is_it_ethical_

This article makes a detailed arguement about whether those who participate in web libel should have their anonymity gauranteed and protected under privacy laws. I won’t comment on that, except to say that internet critics currently have anonymity–as we know all too well. This anonymity enables them to make some pretty nasty comments which, whether true or false, inevitably become problematic for those being criticized.
http://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/other-views/story/1255416.html