Showing posts with label Online Profile. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Online Profile. Show all posts

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Sue Scheff: Are you jeopardizing your job with social media?



By: Chip Dizard
Go to Chip's Home Page

You have heard the horror stories, last year, a North Carolina school district disciplined several faculty members for Facebook content such as personal photos and comments about students. Wired.com reported that an Associated Press staffer in Philadelphia was reprimanded for a Facebook posting that criticized his company.


According to Sharlyn Lauby, president of ITM Group, a human resources consulting firm says "If I can put up pictures of the kids, I can put up pictures from a meeting,". "If I can talk about a recipe I saw with my sister, I can put up an article about something I saw that's work-related. ... People are talking about you, whether you want them to or not. As a company, you need to think about how you want to be positioned."


Companies are now dealing with this dilemma because work and personal lives often collide. Many companies have resorted to blocking social networking sites due to lost productivity and network concerns.


The key for employees to know is that whatever you post online can be used against you. Employers are often checking your online profile as a condition of employment. I had a client recently come to me about a web site link , she consented to do an interview on a major cable network, but it was for a surgery she wanted to keep private. So when you googled her name her employees found out that she had cosmetic surgery. This was something she agreed to with the cable network and it couldn't be taken down. For those people who want to protect their reputation, there are a few companies that will do that for a fee. One that is very popular is Reputation Defender.


Whatever you do, just be wise and trust your gut, if it seems inappropriate it probably is, I always err on the side of caution, especially in the workplace.

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Sue Scheff: ReputationDefender Blog Article



Source: ReputationDefender Blog





By Michael Fertik

Old and New Information Wanting to Be Free

According to Wikipedia, the phrase “information wants to be free” is an “expression that has come to be the unofficial motto of the free content movement.” Much of what we do at ReputationDefender has to do with this concept.





Do we as a society and as individuals really want every type of information to be visible to anyone, at any time? Do we want our medical history, phone numbers, old addresses and private photos to be as readily accessible as, say, who played third base for the Red Sox in 1912? (The answer to this question is found below).



I recently read a couple of books that, specifically speaking in one case and broadly speaking in another, illustrate the narrative of information’s wanting to be free (in the sense of freely available), and the potentially history-altering or life-changing consequences that may arrive when it is.



The Mystery and Meaning of the Dead Sea Scrolls by Hershel Shanks tells the story of the battle to wrest access over the Scrolls, discovered in the early 1950s, from an exclusionary group of scholars who more or less refused to publish or grant access to them for decades. It also offers a precis of the potential religious and historical significance the scrolls, including possible redefinition of the relationship between Christianity and Judaism. Even though the Scrolls represented the most significant biblical archaeological find of the 20th century, the scholars who worked on deciphering them declined to publish their findings or even more than very narrowly disseminate facsimiles of the primary materials for a startlingly long time. It was not till Shanks and a handful of others forced the hands of the scholars that the world finally was able to see the scrolls for themselves. Now, thanks to their good efforts and the power of the Internet, together with the work of places like the Library of Congress, we can all see detailed images of the scrolls themselves, at any time, wherever we are in the world.



The publication of the primary material of scrolls has generated a massive bibliography and new fields of scholarship (including one called Qumran Studies, after the location of the scrolls’ discovery). In this case, information really did want to be free, and it took the hard work of a dedicated group of people to make it free.



Still, it seems, there are persistent and, according to Shanks, apparently plausible rumors of other intact Dead Sea Scrolls that are circulating in private hands around the world. The information bound up in these items, should they exist, needs to be set free through their publication, so that a more complete picture of this historical time can continue to be assembled. Even more scrolls are expected to be lurking in caves around Qumran the entrances to which have been covered up by earthquake over the millennia.



Gunther Grass’s memoir Peeling the Onion gets at the theme of information freedom differently. Grass, a Nobel prize winning German author, has been writing for more than half a century, during which time he has been an outspoken literary and activist left-of-center critic of Germany’s Nazi past, of its collective guilt, and of insufficient transparency and penance among the German people for their participation in the Holocaust and in the other crimes of the Third Reich. In the mid-1980s, he attacked President Reagan and Chancellor Kohl for visiting a cemetery than included Waffen graves. He was often described as–and seems to have been comfortable with the appellation–one of Germany’s chief moral authorities.



However, in 2006, it was revealed that Grass had himself been a member of the Waffen-SS. He joined when he was 17. Spiegel Online confirmed the basic facts of this story through the publication of several historical records. Grass published Peeling the Onion that year. While it purports to be a memoir of his life, or at least the first few decades of it, more or less up to the time he started writing The Tin Drum, one can’t help but get the feeling that he wrote it as an apologia pro sua Waffen vita. In one long stretch of the book–the longest and most detailed piece of it, at least as my memory serves me as I write this–he makes himself out to be a coward (but only just) in World War II.





He runs away, he doesn’t know how to use a gun, he fears for his life, he soils himself, he spends time in a POW camp, etc.. It comes across, after all the nouns and verbs, as an attempt to explain away the significance of his fighting for the Reich and his subsequent decades of hiding it. Was he really a Nazi? This seems very unlikely. But it did seem to me that, burdened by his secret and the gap between his public persona and his private history, and perhaps also worried that the information about his past would eventually want to be free, Grass set out to cast it in the most luminous and best-shaped bronze he could.



As a book, Peeling the Onion is also a powerful literary biography of a man who must be one of the most highly literate writers now living. Grass gives us the source material from his life experiences of some of his brightly vivid major and minor characters. I am guessing that the memoir will be used as some sort of key to unlock his novels and plays by Grass scholars for many years to come. I also doubt that Grass’s past will obliterate entirely my own view of his writing (The Meeting at Telgte is outstanding). But in the end, I don’t think I will cherish this memoir.



Two books about information that, we might say, should be free.



(The answer to the question who played third base for Red Sox in 1912 is Larry Gardner. This is the kind of obscure piece of information that becomes immediately accessible on the Internet, through a single search on a major search engine. I’ll be revisiting what we might call the Larry Gardner Theory of the Internet in future writings).

Tuesday, May 12, 2009

Sue Scheff: Facebook, MySpace, Social Networking 101

Source: Toronto Sun

More like Casebook
Social networking sites can sometimes make or break a case in court


By VIVIAN SONG, NATIONAL BUREAU

Be careful what you post on Facebook or MySpace, because anything you say or upload can and will be used against you in a court of law.

Last year, for example, an Ottawa court heard that a civil servant had started a clandestine affair with an old friend she reconnected with through Facebook during a messy custody battle involving three kids.

In a Vancouver courtroom last month, defendants in a personal injury case produced photos from the plaintiff's Facebook profile showing that while Myla Bagasbas was seeking $40,000 in damages for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment after a car accident, she was still able to kayak, hike and bike post-accident.

"Facebook will be seen as a gold mine for evidence in court cases," said Ian Kerr, Canada Research Chair in ethics, law and technology at the University of Ottawa.

But it will also challenge the courts to further define the notion of personal privacy. In a precedent-setting case this year, a Toronto judge ordered that a man suing for physical injury in a car accident be cross-examined on the contents of his private Facebook profile. Justice David Brown of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice overturned a previous court decision that called the defendant's request to look for incriminating evidence a "fishing expedition."

The very nature of Facebook is to share personal information with others, Brown wrote, and is likely to contain relevant information about how the plaintiff, John Leduc, had led his life since the accident. But if Leduc's profile is private with restricted access, is that considered an invasion of privacy?

"The courts sometimes don't get it," Kerr said. "The tendency in judicial opinion and popular thinking is that once something is out in the public, there's no such thing as privacy anymore. But that can't be right because we all have curtains."

For Facebook users, those curtains are our privacy settings. If our home is our castle, Facebook should also be considered a walled domain, Kerr said.

For example, while a member may post pictures from a beer bash the night before, that doesn't mean they would take the same pictures to show off to their boss the next day, Kerr explained.

Likewise, in Murphy versus Perger, a judge ordered that the plaintiff, who was suing for claims of personal injury and loss of enjoyment of life after a car accident, produce copies of her Facebook pages showing photos of her engaging in social activities. In her judgment, Ontario Superior Court Justice Helen Rady wrote "The plaintiff could not have a serious expectation of privacy given that 366 people have been granted access to the private site."

But having 366 Facebook friends doesn't entitle the rest of the world to view personal information meant only for certain eyes, said Avner Levin, director of the Privacy Institute at Toronto's Ryerson University.

"It's not how many people you share it with, it's who you choose to share the information with," Levin said. "The judge is missing the point. What's important is not how many people are your friends, but who you choose to know you."

While we're able to compartmentalize and separate people in our lives offline by assigning titles to different spheres -- co-workers, neighbours, family -- the online world fails to recognize those distinctions, he added.

It's a habit that spills over in the job hunt as well. Employers admit they rely heavily on information they glean about a candidate from Google searches and networking profile pages. But it's an unfair screening process, Levin said, and attaches more value to people's online identities -- and sometimes third-party information -- than the candidate they meet in real life.

"We need to suppress that tendency to go on Google and look people up. There's already a process of hiring that works for them and has been working for years," Levin said.

While we're more likely to trust a direct source and treat gossip with skepticism in the offline world, the same can't be said of online information.

Pruning online identities and putting a person's best cyber-foot forward are services offered by companies such as DefendMyName, a personal PR service which posts positive information about a client and pushes down negative links in Google. ReputationDefender also destroys libelous, private or outdated content.

"A resume is no longer what you send to your employer," said ReputationDefender CEO Michael Fertik. "More people look at Google as a resume."

But instead of authenticating information found online, people are trusting secondary material and treating Google like God.

"What happens is in a court of law, you have to prove something beyond a reasonable doubt. On the Internet though, many decisions are based on lower standards," Fertik said.

But is sanitizing a person's online reputation of unflattering content an infringement of freedom of speech and freedom of expression?

"Only if you believe Google is the best and most accurate source of information," Fertik said. "But I don't think Google is God. I believe Google is a machine."

vivian.song@sunmedia.ca

Thursday, April 2, 2009

Michael Fertik Discusses Online Reputation Management on National Public Radio


As my new book is getting ready to be released, you can’t ignore the importance of Online Reputation Services and what they can offer to all people - whether it is protecting your children online, maintaining your reputation in cyberspace or simply having a positive online image. These services are priceless and many know my story and my success with ReputationDefender. I feel I have to say, I am not their spokesperson, nor do I receive any referral fees from them, but as a victim and survivor of Internet Defamation, I can personally attest their integrity and concern for keeping you safe in space.





Recently the CEO of ReputationDefender, Michael Fertik, was featured on NPR - take time to listen to his sound and informational advice.



Friday, February 6, 2009

Sue Scheff: Reputation Defender Featured on CBS Early Show


(CBS) Did you ever "google" yourself and find something negative?

It should worry you. Just one negative posting can cost you a job

It's estimated that more than 70 percent of employers do a Web search on job applicants as part of their hiring procedures. More than half of them admit to not bringing someone on board because of negative information they found online.

It could be something you posted years ago, or something put into cyberspace by someone you know - or even a perfect stranger.

What can you do about it?

Michael Fertik, founder of ReputationDefender.com, had some advice on The Early Show Saturday Edition.

Fertik says he started the business two years ago with one person. He now has 60 employees. His service costs about $10 a month.

Fertik told substitute co-anchor Seth Doane that safeguarding your online reputation is “as important as your credit score nowadays. Every life transaction that you have, whether you’re looking for a job, you’re looking for romance, you’re looking for a friend - people are gonna look you up on the Web and make conclusions based on what they find.

"One random, idiosyncratic piece of content about you on the Web could dominate your Google results forever," he said. "It's such an issue: It affects people who are undeserving, people who are sort of using bad judgment, all kinds of different people."

What's worse, legal recourse is murky at best, Fertik observed, saying, "The law hasn't caught up yet with privacy. The Internet has really changed the privacy landscape in a big way and the law hasn't yet caught up with it. It's lagging behind, so far."

Fertik stressed that, "You have to be on top of your (online) reputation. It's not about narcissism. It’s about your personal brand. Especially in a down economy, people are looking you up, they’re making decisions. They're denying you a job unless they find something really good about you on the Web."

He had three key pieces of advice:

First, never let anyone set up your reputation online. Establish yourself online to create a clear and positive image of you. Don't wait for someone else to destroy it. Use what he calls "Google insurance": Create a profile on something like Facebook that's positive and tasteful. Claim the real estate on your name. What is said about you on the Web isn't a function of you living a righteous life: Anyone can say something bad about you. "Write your own history," he recommended.

Second, if there's a problem with your online reputation, you have to find it. Constantly monitor the Web. Search for full names, usernames, etc. Be on top of the game. Go deep into the Internet to Web sites that aren't indexed by Google: "The deep Web - Facebook, MySpace, the pages where the content really starts to generate and become problematic."

"Monitor yourself assiduously," Fertik told Doane.

Third: The longer it's there, the more it spreads and can be archived. If you see a problem, deal with it quickly. Get in touch with people and tell them to stop, in a kind and thoughtful way, without getting a lawyer involved right away. Reach them on a human level. If you want professional help, companies such as ReputationDefender are available. As Fertik told Doane, "Nip it in the bud before it spreads and gets mirrored and replicated. If you can't do it, you want to hire the pros."

If you do find something bad about yourself, how do you get it offline?




"Sometimes," Fertik responded to Doane, "what we do is, we overwhelm the 'bad' with good to make sure that when people look you up, they see what you want them to see, they see your good videos, not necessarily the (bad ones)."

Thursday, January 29, 2009

Sue Scheff: What are your teens posting online?


This is a very interesting article that will make parents think when safety trumps privacy - do you suspect your teen or tween is posting disturbing photos or communicating with questionable others? As a parent is is our responsibility to help keep our kids safe online. Having open lines of communication can help tremendously and helping them to understand the consequences of unflattering posts is critical.


We will spy on your teen’s website for you


More and more worried parents are resorting to using data-tracking services to keep up with what their teenagers are doing on the internet, writes Siobhan Cronin



Irish parents are the best in Europe at monitoring their kids on the internet. However, their kids are the least likely of all European children to turn to mum or dad for advice when something happens to them online.


These were the results of a recent survey by the European Commission into internet supervision by parents.


While our parents might be good at keeping tabs on their kids, cyber bullying is still on the increase, sometimes with tragic results.


Cork girl Leanne Wolfe’s horrific tales of bullying were revealed in her diary, days after her death by suicide last year.


Her sister later told of the nasty text messages and vicious internet entries which led Leanne to take her own life.


It is real-life stories like Leanne’s which have led thousands of American parents — and now a few hundred Irish ones — to resort to using a service that will keep tabs on what their children are reading, and uploading, on the web.


But it’s not just bullying that worries parents. Unfettered access to the web for our kids has also meant open access to them from anyone who is ‘roaming’ around in cyberspace.


This has led some parents to take the ultimate action — spying on their own children.


The founder of Reputation Defender, Michael Fertik, has been called to justify his online service: “Would you like to know your 16-year-old daughter is putting pictures of herself wearing only a bra on the web? Yes. People are not born with good judgment and it rarely develops by 15,” he says.
But another defence of Fertik’s service is, he claims, the prevalence of web bullying.


“When we were at school, we wrote mean notes to each other but you threw the piece of paper out the next day — now it’s on the internet wall forever,” he says.


Fertik’s solution, MyChild, scours the internet for all references to your child — by name, photography, screen name, or social network profiles.


For about €9.95 per month, the ‘online spy’ will send you a report of what your child has posted on the worldwide web.


Its approach is unashamedly tapping into parents’ paranoia: “Worried about bullies? Concerned that your teens’ friends and peers are posting inappropriate materials online,” the site asks.
Fertik, who says he has a “few hundred” Irish customers already, says his company grew out of a need to protect online privacy.


“Young people do the same things that they always did,” he points out. But now it’s on a wall on a web page. The internet is like a tattoo parlour.”


The firm, which started in his apartment in Kentucky, and now employs 65 staff servicing 35 countries, brought in revenues of $5.5m (€4.3m) this year.


He insists there is no “hacking” involved. His staff go through legitimate channels, but are simply better trained in the ways of teenage internet usage than most parents.


“We always encourage the parent to get the password — we don’t want to be spying on kids,” he adds.


One of the things that often causes concern among parents is the practice of their own lives being discussed on a website. “These things have always been discussed by children, but now it’s up there for everyone to see. Things like: ‘My parents are fighting’ or ‘I think they are going to get a divorce’.”


In pre-web days, we all had very intimate conversations with our peers about our home lives — either in person, or on the phone. Now it’s all on the internet, Fertik notes.


Once the offending material is identified, Reputation Defender can delete it, on the instructions of the parent, whether it involves comments, photographs or videos posted on social-networking sites, or on chat rooms or forums.


The service has become so popular that the company now offers packages to adults to manage search engine results, ‘reputation’ for career purposes, and general ‘privacy’ — so that you can stop sites selling your personal information to others.


But that very privacy is the reason that children’s rights organisations around the world have come out strongly against the practice.


Michael McLoughlin of Youthwork Ireland, which provides support and youth services for over 40,000 young people, says that while there may be some justification of the service for younger teens, this could become somewhat blurred when dealing with children of 16 or 17 years of age.
“At that stage in their lives they should really know what they are doing themselves,” he says. Youthwork Ireland is currently preparing guidelines for youth workers dealing with online bullying. “We try to tool them up on social networking, and try to improve the safety aspects.”
The ISPCC agrees that children need to be made aware of the risks of online networking.


However, National Childline Manager Margie Roe says that while parents need to respect privacy and maintain trust, they also need to police their children if they think they might be in any danger.


“If a parent is concerned about their child, they have a right to protect them,” she says.


“They need to be careful they don’t damage the trust between them and their child, but if they feel their behaviour is in anyway unusual, or their child is disappearing a lot, then it could be justified.”


This would be particularly relevant if parents are concerned their children might be making plans to hook up with people they have only met online, says Margie.


Michael Fertik is adamant that he is not doing anything ethically wrong.


“If a kid is 18 or older, we won’t do it. Parents who are signing up for this feel they don’t know how to keep up with their kids and they don’t understand Facebook or Bebo.”


He says the children themselves have mastered the art of ‘multiple’ personalities, in order to make discovery of their sites more difficult, but Reputation Defender is on their case.


However, even Fertik’s own ’solution’ can be subject to unsavoury interference. The system flags a query when the last name of the parent does not match the child’s, prompting further requests from the applicant, before they are given information on the child’s use of the web.
Fertik’s attitude appears to be that online surveillance is now a necessary evil in our modern world.


“There is no medical privacy for kids, no legal privacy. We are not suggesting they shouldn’t be allowed use the internet, but it’s like driving a car — you want to make sure they know how to drive first.


“We are not spying on someone else’s kid. It’s a new day, the internet brings new threats, and we need new armour.”
- Siobhan Cronin

Friday, January 9, 2009

Sue Scheff: Reputation Defender is a Growing Demand as the Internet Expands

As a victim and survivor of the wicked web (at times), I was vindicated at a jury trial for damages when I was awarded over $11M for the defamatory comments posted about me.
I credit my attorney, David Pollack, for successfully proving to the jury how I was damaged (defamed) online. Remember, free speech does not condone defamation.

What happens after the jury goes home and I have my $11.3M judgment? Well, you get a lot of media attention, new stalkers arrive, you become a Limited Public Figure (something I was not prior this major victory), and before you know it - you are the face of Internet Defamation Survivor. However what it doesn’t do is erase the ugliness the perpetrator did to you online.
For that, I sought out the services of Reputation Defender. O-kay, so you can’t literally erase all the unflattering online statements - but you can start filling the web with who you really are - and what you believe in.

I used ReputationDefender MyEdge - which is a priceless service for anyone that owns a business or has a reputation to protect. You can have a 20 year old reputable company literally destroyed within 20 minutes with a few keystrokes!

Here are some articles to help you find out more about how Reputation Defender can help you.
As a parent advocate, I always recommend MyChild - which helps parents monitor where their child’s name is being used! Remember, kids think that applying for colleges and filling out employment applications is far away - in a child’s mind, 2-4 years seems like a lifetime - but in reality - what goes online today - can haunt them tomorrow and years from tomorrow.

My Good Name Protector ReputationDefender Raises $2.6M In 1st Round
VentureBeat on Reputation Defender
ReputationDefender Official Blog
Teacher Fired Over MySpace Photo
Mahalo on Reputation Defender
Reputation Defender Official MySpace
Wired.com - Delete Your Bad Web Rep
Mashable.com on Reputation Defender
Fast Company on Reputation Defender
CyberLaw - Stanford.edu - Reputation Defender Article
Reputation Defender Turnstile
WRAL - Local Tech Wire
TradeVibes - Reputation Defender

There are many more…. I receive many emails from people all over the country and world that are being harmed online - many cannot afford the high costs of litigation. I always recommend Reputation Defender as an alternative or in combination with the legal route.

I am not a spokesperson for Reputation Defender, nor do I receive money or referral fees from them - I simply am a very satisfied client and want others to know there is such a service out there as Internet Gossip can be viewed as FACT. In many cases, that can hurt a persons’ reputation.

Friday, June 20, 2008

Sue Scheff: Help Protect Your Children Online


On Tuesday, June 17th Dr. Paul featured Michael Fertik, CEO of Reputation Defender. If you are a parent of a child that surfs online - this is an important Podcast for your to listen to.



Michael Fertik is a repeat Internet entrepreneur and CEO with experience in technology and law. After law school, he clerked for Chief Judge Danny J. Boggs of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States. He is a graduate of Harvard College and Harvard Law School. His company, Reputation Defender, helps parents to know what is online about their children, and provides services to find and eliminate potentially dangerous or damaging content.




On this call, Michael discusses some important information and resources to help parents become more proactive about knowing what is out there about their family, and doing something about it.

Friday, May 9, 2008

Sue Scheff: ReputationDefender Launches New Service, MyEdge



Since signing up with ReputationDefender after winning my $11.3M jury verdict for damages done to me on the Internet, I have proudly spoken out about this priceless service. Even winning my unprecedented case, it didn't eliminate the horrific, malicious defamatory statements online about me.


I retained ReputationDefender and was amazed at how they were able to have my Online image match up with my in person reputation. In a matter of months, my Online Profile was back to normal and I felt like a new person.


Now they have launched their latest service ReputationDefender MyEdge which is a personal PR for the web for you! Now everyone is able to maintain their reputations and most importantly promote themselves and regain their reputation online.


Lastly, I continue to encourage parents to review/sign up for ReputationDefender/MyChild to help maintain their child's privacy online especially in the growing social networks.


I am not a spokesperson for ReputationDefender and I am not in anyway reciprocated for my endorsement of them - I am simply a person that has used this service and believe they are priceless and truly believe everyone needs to protect themselves online today.