Wanted: Good men and women to serve as a part of a historic Presidential administrative team. Must be a team player and able to handle pressure. Familiarity with deadlines essential, complex screening process applies. Equal Opportunity Employer.
On the heels of the Obama campaign being swept into 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue there have been a lot of job slots opening up. Some are newly created, others are being vacated as the Bush administration heads out and Obama moves in. In both cases bodies are needed to fill the seats. But not just any bodies. Barack Obama is very aware of the Internet and how it can help and hinder a cause. Given this, it should come as no surprise to anyone that he is being VERY thorough about who gets a spot on the “O” team.
The process begins with a seven-page questionnaire that has been sent by the office of the President-elect to those seeking cabinet and other high-ranking posts. The New York Times has commented that this process may be the most extensive (“some say invasive”) application ever.
And just what does those questions cover? 63 requests for personal and professional records, for starters, covering the applicants’ spouses and grown children as well. Good luck for speeders (sort of): traffic tickets with fines of less than $50 do not need not be reported, but anyone with a family member in the NRA take note, the application asks whether the applicant or anyone in their family owns a firearm.
While all of this is interesting from a political standpoint, what really caught our eye was the provision that all applicants must include any e-mail that might embarrass the president-elect, along with any blog posts and links to their Facebook pages. As we have noted before on this blog, Obama is the Internet President, and he is covering his digital bases. The application goes on further to ask for applicants to “list all aliases or ‘handles’ you have used to communicate on the Internet.”
Of course the competition for a job in the White House has always been high, even if you weren’t gunning for Commander-In-Chief. The vetting process has been modified and added on to with each incoming administration, but Mr. Obama has taken his background hunts to a new level, especially with regards to applicants’ family members. The Obama camp stands behind their process, though, stating “President-elect Obama made a commitment to change the way Washington does business, and the vetting process exemplifies that.”
With the economy large in many Americans’ minds, the Obama campaign has sought to minimize any potential red flags in their hiring by avoiding hot topics like Freddie Mac and Fannie May. Question 18 of the Obama application asks the applicant whether “you, your spouse or any member of your immediate family” has been affiliated with either of the two failed mortgage institutions, as well as American International Group, Washington Mutual or any other institution getting a piece of the government bailout.
Remembering the trouble that Bill Clinton got into back in the early 90s, immigration status is questioned in the “Domestic Help” section that covers housekeepers, nannies, chauffeurs and yard-workers. Beyond that, applicants are requested to supply not only a résumé, but every résumé and biographical statement they’ve used in the last decade.
Oh yeah, and while you’re at it, the application requires the names of anyone an applicant has lived with, a chronological list of activities for which they were paid, documentation of real estate and loans over $10,000, and net worth statements submitted for loans. Furthermore, applicants must report all businesses that they and/or their spouses have been affiliated with and all gifts over $50 that they and their spouses have received from anyone other than close friends or relatives.
The catch all, though is at the end: “Please provide any other information, including information about other members of your family, that could suggest a conflict of interest or be a possible source of embarrassment to you, your family, or the president-elect.”
The message is clear. While Barack Obama understood the power of the internet to raise money and spread his message of change, he is also aware of how the internet can adversely affect people in the digital age.
ReputationDefender Blog has written extensively about how online activities can affect your personal life. It seems that meme is spreading. This video from College Humor is a perfect example of how our real world experiences are colored by our online activities. Also, as this post points out, you should never let your friends mess with your accounts.
Barack Obama was elected as the 44th President of the United States this week, and a large part of his platform was centered on the notion of change. Wasting no time, and aiming to be the first true Internet President, Barack Obama launched the official website for his transition to the White House. On Thursday www.change.gov, went online with an invitation for users to offer their ideas for the future of the country. The website further entreats readers to “Share Your Vision” via email.
There’s a countdown to the inauguration on the site, noting the number of days until January 20, 2009 when Obama will be sworn in. In terms of media, there is a blog posting that displays a YouTube video of Obama’s Tuesday victory speech in Chicago.
A quote from Obama is featured on the page, reading: “Today we begin in earnest the work of making sure that the world we leave our children is just a little bit better than the one we inhabit today.” More to the point during this time of economic woe, users can apply for jobs via the website. The site is pretty straightforward, but the degree to which Obama has attempted, with success, to harness and embrace the Internet during his campaign, and now during his transition to the White House, is impressive.
Following the historic election of Barack Obama, the postmortem for the McCain campaign can officially begin. As Washington insiders and Republican pundits look to see where they can improve in the coming years, people will point to different aspects of the McCain campaign and analyze it endlessly.
We’ve run some internal polling data through the series of tubes and think that this single moment was when McCain lost the election. It was not after the polls closed in California last night. It was when he decided to get extra dramatic during the debates.
It seems the two titans of search that got together earlier in the year, Google and Yahoo, have ended their whirlwind romance and have agreed to go their own separate ways. Google was always the stronger of the two, better known and more popular, but Yahoo brought a certain Je ne sais quoi to the relationship that people liked. It was good while it lasted. Try not to get all weepy, kids. And don’t forget: it’s not your fault.
Ending our agreement with Yahoo!11/05/2008 07:00:00 AMIn June we announced an advertising agreement with Yahoo! that gave Yahoo! the option of using Google to provide ads on its websites (and its publisher partners’ sites) in the U.S. and Canada. At the same time, both companies agreed to delay implementation of the agreement to give regulators the chance to review it. While this wasn’t legally necessary, we thought it was the right thing to do because Google and Yahoo! have been successful in online advertising and we realized that any cooperation between us would attract attention.We feel that the agreement would have been good for publishers, advertisers, and users — as well, of course, for Yahoo! and Google. Why? Because it would have allowed Yahoo! (and its existing publisher partners) to show more relevant ads for queries that currently generate few or no advertisements. Better ads are more useful for users, more efficient for advertisers, and more valuable for publishers.However, after four months of review, including discussions of various possible changes to the agreement, it’s clear that government regulators and some advertisers continue to have concerns about the agreement. Pressing ahead risked not only a protracted legal battle but also damage to relationships with valued partners. That wouldn’t have been in the long-term interests of Google or our users, so we have decided to end the agreement.We’re of course disappointed that this deal won’t be moving ahead. But we’re not going to let the prospect of a lengthy legal battle distract us from our core mission. That would be like trying to drive down the road of innovation with the parking brake on. Google’s continued success depends on staying focused on what we do best: creating useful products for our users and partners.
With less than a day before Americans go to the polls, the two Presidential candidates have done their share of getting media attention. Between interviews, stump speeches and press junkets you’d think there’d be nothing more they could do to win votes. You’d think wrong.
In yet another sign that the apocalypse Internet Age, is fully upon us, The Christian Science Monitor has announced that it will cease publishing its weekday print editions and convert into an online only operation, with the exception of a new weekend magazine. While this news is not directly applicable to the Online Reputation Management Industry, it is an important symbol of a fast-turning tide in media consumption. Whereas people would traditionally turn to magazines, newspapers or television for information, they are now turning to the Internet in greater numbers.
The internet is increasingly becoming a larger part of people’s lives. From Online Dating to Online Trading, to eCommerce, people are more apt to use the net for transactions that were largely off line endeavors just a few years ago. CSM moving away from print may signal a new paradigm for news services who are struggling with declining circulation in a wired world.
One day this past summer, I logged on to Facebook and realized that I was very close to having 700 online “friends.” Not bad, I thought to myself, absurdly proud of how many cyberpals, connections, acquaintances and even strangers I’d managed to sign up.
[SNIP]
So I decided to have a Facebook party. I used Facebook to create an “event” and invite my digital chums. Some of them, of course, didn’t live in Toronto, but I figured, it’s summer and people travel. You never know who might be in town. If they lived in Buffalo or Vancouver, they could just click “not attending,” and that would be that. Facebook gives people the option of R.S.V.P.’ing in three categories — “attending,” “maybe attending” and “not attending.”
After a week the responses stopped coming in and were ready to be tabulated. Fifteen people said they were attending, and 60 said maybe. A few hundred said not, and the rest just ignored the invitation altogether. I figured that about 20 people would show up. That sounded pretty good to me. Twenty potential new friends.
On the evening in question I took a shower. I shaved. I splashed on my tingly man perfume. I put on new pants and a favorite shirt. Brimming with optimism, I headed over to the neighborhood watering hole and waited.
And waited.
And waited.
Eventually, one person showed up.
The article is worth a read, not only because it is well written, but also because it shows the shift between virtual friendships and real world relationships. ReputationDefender has shown how social networking is changing the way people connect online. As this piece shows, the Facebook phenomenon may be changing the way we connect in the real world, as well.
It is nothing new to say that the Internet, over the last few years, has become increasingly interactive. Social networks and the rise of blogs and tweets have changed the way we connect to others through the internet. Heck, the change was so pronounced, they even coined a new term for it. Increasingly, people are not merely passively absorbing the media given to them, they are responding to and reinterpreting that media. While this is not new either, the speed at which these responses can be transmitted and then picked up by others is infinitely faster given the shared online thought process that typifies Web 2.0.
Take, for instance, the video below, titled simply “Palin Song”:
Media is no longer a one-way street. With a computer and access to the Internet anyone can participate in the discussion and effectively become a participant in the media itself. As long as access to the Internet continues unfettered this trend will absolutely continue and grow in depth and scope. It is human nature to interact with our environment, and the Internet has made thought accessible by anyone who is plugged in. We’ve already seen how the growth of blogs has come to affect the news cycle; facts are endlessly checked by untold numbers of would-be Woodwards and Bernsteins. This new, interactive chapter in the media is just getting started. It’s a brave new Internet world.
ReputationDefender Blog found this fun little site on the Internet recently. While all sites have something of a limited lifespan that is directly proportional to their relevance, this one, given Sarah Palin’s innate appeal, could in fact become more popular when the election is over, regardless of who wins.
It’s already October and, with a presidential election looming just around the corner, the reek of partisan politics is thick in the air. Between the endless campaign commercials, the 24 hour-a-day news coverage and the relentless rhetoric from both parties, we at the ReputationDefender Blog wouldn’t blame you for getting a little tired of it all. Thankfully, however, presidential races do tend to produce the best comedy, just ask the folks at Saturday Night Live.
Along these lines, we wanted to share this satirical Facebook profile we found of Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin. To be on the safe side, I’m going to say it’s NSFW. Oh, and one more note, if you think that this kind of satire is disrespectful or in poor taste, the Kingdom of Morocco agrees with you, which is why 26 year-old Fouad Mourtada now faces 5 years in prison for the “identity theft” of Prince Moulay Rachid.
We saw this parody piece online recently and thought it was funny. ReputationDefender should note that rumors of our acquisition by Google are greatly exaggerated. Still, this is a fun piece and worth a look and a link.
In a perfect example of online business synergy, Google has announced the purchase of ReputationDefender, the online company devoted to helping people repair their cyber-reputation.
“This is an amazing breakthrough,” said a Google spokesperson. “As we all know, Google causes 99.9 percent of the damage to someone’s reputation to begin with, because we can’t be sued for archiving it in our search engine, even though Google is the only reason most people would find the defamation in the first place. I mean, someone gets defamed on a board with a dozen people reading, no one would notice, but when they search the target by name, it comes right up for anyone
snooping. What this means is the need for sites like ReputationDefender will never go away.”
We especially liked the predicted need for defending reputations in the future in this piece.
Online Reputation Management is essential in the digital age. ReputationDefender has the best team in the industry to manage your Google presence, even if the Mountain View search giant hasn’t acquired us (yet).
ReputationDefender encourages parents to educate their children about online safety and their online reputation. Any readers have online teen safety tips? Let us know in the comments!
# 1. Rockin’ Freebird!
# 2. Rubbing cream on that thing I noticed last weekend. Doesn’t seem to be working.
# 3. Buying DC Universe Classics Wave 5 the Atom at Wal-Mart! Build-a-figure Metallo is complete!
# 4. Feeling trapped in this male body.
# 5. Jesus, I’m lonely.
# 6. D’oh! Accidentally trimmed my pickin’ nail.
# 7. Watching The Notebook again.
# 8. Quick! Does anyone know the age of consent in Kentucky?
# 9. Just came up with a new emoticon for sanguine [:<≠>
# 10. Thinking about maybe talking to someone.
![[Image]](http://onemansblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/09/drinking.jpg){kind=link}