Terrific satire from The Onion. http://tinyurl.com/yja55lx

Tweet This Post

Apple iPhone Will Let Users Unlock Doors?

With your Apple iPhone you can listen to music, watch movies, play games, and, soon enough, even unlock your doors. In a newly published patent application, Apple revealed plans for what some are already calling the iKey, which would use a pin code to unlock electronic locks in a user’s car, home, or office.

PleaseRobMe.com helped show the social media world the folly of using location-based social networking websites when you were away from your home, but Gowalla and Foursquare may be the least of your worries if someone can steal your iPhone and have keys to your home. For its part, Apple has included security features that could trigger an alarm for unauthorized use of the iKey.

UK Government Pushes Facebook for ‘Panic Button’

Following the murder of 17-year-old Ashleigh Hall by a man whom she met on Facebook, the UK government is pushing Facebook and other social networking websites to include a “panic button” that would help users get immediate law enforcement assistance if they believe they are being victimized. Facebook first discussed the possibility of adding a panic button, similar to the kind found on the social networking website Bebo, back in December.

Conan O’Brien Invited to the Wedding of his New Best Friend on Twitter

After turning 19-year-old Sarah Killen into an Internet celebrity overnight by selecting her as the first person that he would follow on Twitter, Conan O’Brien has received an invitation to join Killen and her fiance John Slowik, Jr. at their wedding. Considering the positive response that Conan has gotten for his interaction with Killen thus far, I wouldn’t be surprised to see him don a tux and make a speech for the young couple. In fact, he could probably turn it into a web-only video special. Who needs The Tonight Show, right?

Twitter Takes on Phishing Scams

As Twitter has grown, so too has the website’s phishing problem. In particular, the recent spate of “Is this you?” direct message phishing attacks have prompted Twitter to rexamine how it’s protecting users from scammers. After analyzing the problem, Twitter has come up with a few fixes that they hope will make it harder for phishing attacks to spread. For one thing, Twitter will be rerouting all direct messages through its anti-phishing service before allowing them to be sent. Also, Twitter will be replacing bit.ly and other short URLs with their own, twit.tl, to signify that the link is secure.

Classmates.com Faces Privacy Lawsuit

In an attempt to play catch up with Facebook, Classmates.com opened up its public content to sharing on other social networking websites. Ironically, this move did help Classmates.com did catch up with Facebook in one way; now, both websites are facing class-action privacy lawsuits. According to Wired, the lawsuit alleges that Classmates.com switched their privacy policy so egregiously that they have violated Washington state and federal laws. Here is a PDF of the suit – http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/threatlevel/2010/03/classmates.pdf.

Job Hunters Struggle to Get Past the Automatic Job Application

This article from the Miami Herald discusses the frustration that job seekers have in applying for jobs through websites and in-store kiosks instead of through pen and paper applications. When applying for a job online, there are a number of preset filters that make it impossible for many job seekers to even get their application seen. This makes the job hunting process seem futile and causes some people to give up on themselves. One of the things that could help individuals who are unemployed cut through the clutter and connect directly with an employer is proactive personal branding online.

Sites such as LinkedIn and Twitter offer valuable networking possibilities for users that understand how they work. Additionally, setting up a blog can help you get your name out there and distinguish yourself as a respected voice in your industry.

Tweet This Post

What would you say if I told you that a few misguided tweets or a hacked Facebook account could cost you millions of dollars? As the 2010 NFL Draft approaches, this is the unfortunate reality that many hopeful draft prospects are facing.

In a very well-written and deeply researched article for FootballOutsiders.com, Mike Tanier makes the argument that NFL prospects have no privacy and that even the most minute indiscretions online could cost them a higher spot in the draft, meaning a lower salary and a lower chance of picking up endorsement deals.

Tanier even goes so far as to outline a few eerily plausible scenarios in which players could get burned, both through their own fault and through sabotage.

Quoting from the article:

• A star college quarterback sends a text message to five friends, bragging about his performance against a rival school. One of the friends forwards it to another set of friends, and one of them sends it to a few other people. The message finds its way to the blogosphere, then to ESPN. Soon football fans around the Internet are questioning the quarterback’s character and judgment for “distributing” inflammatory bulletin board material.
• An angry crank with an axe to grind against a top defensive prospect searches the Internet for dirt on his prey. An ordinary Google search turns up not just public data, but postings from the defender’s Twitter and Facebook accounts. The crank establishes an anti-prospect Web site, mixing out-of-context postings with some facts and a sprinkle of innuendo. Maybe he goes a step further, impersonating the player on a phony Twitter account and tweeting vitriol to a confused public. The line between what’s real and what’s fabricated is blurred by reporters and draftniks, who inadvertently cite some of the false or highly distorted information. The prospect’s reputation is tarnished by a cyber-smear campaign. By the time he realizes it, the damage is already done.
• A team hires an investigator to check out the top prospect in the draft, and the investigator isn’t above bending a few laws. In addition to standard background checks, he calls in a few favors with major Internet advertisers. He suddenly has access to the prospect’s “clickstream” information, a full record of the athlete’s browsing and chatting proclivities. Chat sessions at 3 a.m., just hours before kickoff? The general manager may find that interesting. Perhaps a GPS search of the player’s iPhone will provide other revelations …

As a professional athlete, you must live in the public eye. This hard truth is even more apparent in the face of the Tiger Woods scandal. However, these draft prospects are not yet professionals. By and large, they’re just regular college kids who don’t understand the long-term ramifications of their actions online. What’s more, they have grown up in a world where the Internet and digital technology is omnipresent. The thought that something they share on Twitter could be used against them often does not occur until it is too late.

That’s not to say that NFL teams are wrong for using the Internet to research players. To the contrary, if they are going to invest millions of dollars into a player, they have a fiduciary duty to research his past behavior and ensure that he is not going to cause any problems for the team in the future. Just as a recruiter might do a Google search of a job candidate, an NFL scout is going to dig deep to find out whether a player will be a good fit. The difference is, if an NFL prospect is pegged as a bad apple, he’ll not only lose millions of dollars in the draft, but may have to carry that reputation with him for the rest of his career.

Here at the ReputationDefender Blog, we frequently talk about online reputation management for everyday professionals. Whether you’re a dentist, contractor, realtor, or lawyer, it is important to monitor your name online and take proactive measures to establish a strong professional brand. When you look at professional athletes, however, these issues become even more critical. Hopefully, players learn the importance of online reputation management before it’s too late.

Tweet This Post

Facebook and Twitter Ready Geolocation Technologies

In social networking, it’s all about location, location, location. According to this article from PCWorld, both Facebook and Twitter are preparing to launch location-aware tools that will allow users to share their precise geolocation with friends. The widespread application of the technology comes in response to the rise of smartphones such as the iPhone, which allow for sophisticated web access from anywhere. Twitter is expected to premiere its geolocation features during this weekend’s SXSW conference.

While there have already been some privacy concerns over location-based social networking websites, they will only get bigger once Facebook and Twitter step into the game. It will be interesting to see what steps the company’s take to protect their users from sharing too much.

MySpace’s Last Hurrah?

Once upon a time, MySpace was the biggest and baddest social networking website in the land. Then, in only a few years, Facebook caught up, passed it, and never looked back. Since then, MySpace has dealt with numerous changes in management as it has fought to maintain relevant to users.

This article from the LA Times discusses the company’s most recent plan to reinvigorate itself in the social networking space by going back to what made it popular in the first place, entertainment. MySpace hopes that a new focus on entertainment media – including television, movies, and music – will help make the social networking site reclaim its spot as a must-visit destination on the web.

Does Google Have Too Much Power in D.C.?

If Google controls Internet advertising, and Internet advertising is crucial for politicians to win elections, does that mean that some politicians will have a conflict of interest when they deal with Google on privacy and consumer safety issues? That’s the question Jeremy Herb asks in a Boston Globe article which focuses on Google’s significant influence in Washington politics.

Parry Aftab Talks Online Reputation Management and Internet Safety

In a recent article for SmartPlanet, Christina Hernandez talks about the importance of online reputation management and Internet privacy with Internet safety expert and child advocate Parry Aftab. Aftab, whom we have talked about numerous times here at the ReputationDefender Blog, is involved in multiple Internet safety organizations including WiredSafety and WiredKids.

Honolulu Police Department Drops DUI Mugshots Program

The Honolulu police have decided to suspend a controversial program that displayed images of suspected drunk drivers once a week. The police department suspended the pilot program in order to determine its effectiveness, not because of any privacy concerns. When this program was first implemented, we discussed how it may cause unfair reputation damage to individuals who had yet to be found guilty of a crime. Hopefully, before the Honolulu police decide to reimplement the program, they will consider this reality.

Tweet This Post

Are you confused about Internet law?

If someone says something mean about you on Facebook and the company does nothing to remove it, can you sue Facebook? Of course. This is the United States of America. By and large, you can sue anyone for anything. Will you win? More than likely, the answer is no. Why is this the case? Because of a small, but significant provision found in the Communication Decency Act of 1996: 47 U.S.C. Sec. 230, known informally as CDA 230.

Before we get into details on how CDA 230 protects Internet companies from liability related to online content, however, let’s get some background on the Communication Decency Act of 1996 came about.

The Communications Decency Act of 1996 was designated as Title V in the larger legislation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The inclusion of the Communications Decency Act in the greater Telecommunications Act was meant to criminalize obscenity online in the face of the rise of Internet pornography. (Remember, this was 1996, when Internet use was first becoming a common part of American life and people were worried that Internet porn was going to permanently damage our children.) Eventually, the scope of the bill was significantly tightened through the landmark case Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union.

Interestingly, CDA 230 was not an original part of the Communications Decency Act, but was added by the House of Representatives through the Internet Freedom and Family Empowerment Act, which was co-sponsored by Republican representative Chris Cox and Democratic representative Ron Wyden. The purpose of the addition was to protect Internet service providers from being held criminally liable for indecent content that its users posted. In legalese, the CDA 230 read, “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.”

Back in 1996, this legislation applied mainly to companies such as AOL, and other large Internet service providers. As the web has expanded, however, courts have generally held that the definition of “interactive computer service” also includes websites such as Facebook, MySpace, and other social media websites. Some legal scholars consider this interpretation to be too broad however, and have lobbied to reduce the scope of CDA 230 to reflect modern Internet technologies which allow for rampant and protracted cyberattacks.

An important note about the CDA 230 is that it doesn’t mean individuals cannot file a lawsuit against someone who is defaming them online. Quite to the contrary, as demonstrated in ex-model Liskula Cohen’s lawsuit against Google last year, you can sue an Internet company to reveal the identity of someone who is attacking you online. Of course, whether or not a judge compels the company to give up that identity depends on the specifics of your case. Even in this situation, however, the Internet company hosting the defamatory content can not be found liable for any criminal damages.

So, in the big picture, what does CDA 230 mean for web users? For one thing, it means that while Internet companies have an economic interest in protecting users (no users = no advertising = no revenue), they are not legally compelled to do so. As such, if someone decides to level biased or unfair criticisms against you online, it can be difficult to get them removed. If you have a strong legal argument that the content in question is defamatory, you can hire an attorney to file a lawsuit on your behalf, but this process is long, costly, and generally unsatisfactory.

As an alternative, we advise utilizing a multifaceted reputation management solution, combining reputation monitoring with proactive personal and professional branding. To this end, ReputationDefender offers a wide range of products to help our customers protect their good names online, including MyReputation, MyPrivacy, and MyEdge. To learn more about these products, we encourage you to contact one of our Client Solutions Consultants today at 1-888-720-9980.

If the CDA 230 can keep web companies immune from damages, you should have something to protect you too. Let that something be ReputationDefender.

Tweet This Post