Editing Reputation management (section)

==Examples==
Organisations attempt to manage their reputations on websites that many people visit, such as [[eBay]],<ref>{{cite CiteSeerX | first1 = Paul | last1 = Resnick | first2 = Richard | last2 = Zeckhause | citeseerx = 10.1.1.123.5332 | title = Trust among strangers in internet transactions: Empirical analysis of eBay's reputation system | date = May 2, 2001 }}</ref> [[Wikipedia]], and [[Google]]. Some of the tactics used by reputation management firms include:<ref name=C>{{cite news |url=http://news.cnet.com/8301-13530_3-9773755-28.html |title=DIY reputation management |author=Spencer, Stephan |publisher=[[CBS Interactive]] |magazine=[[CNET]] |date=September 12, 2007 |access-date=August 3, 2012}}</ref>

* Modifying the way results from searches are displayed on a search engine such as [[white paper]]s and make appear in priority positive customer testimonials in order to push down negative content<!-- Verbose line for "rearranging search by engine" I rewrote this one line. -->.<ref name=CW />
* Publishing original, positive websites and social media profiles{{Clarify|date=February 2021}}, with the aim of outperforming negative results in a search.<ref name="wash">{{cite news | last=Kinzie |first=Susan   |author2=Ellen Nakashima  |title=Calling In Pros to Refine Your Google Image |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=July 2, 2007  |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/01/AR2007070101355.html?hpid=artslot |access-date =July 12, 2012 }}</ref>
* Submitting online press releases to authoritative websites in order to promote brand presence and [[Censorship|suppress negative content.]]
* Submitting legal take-down requests if [[Strategic lawsuit against public participation|they have or pretend to have been libeled]].<ref name="cnet"/>
* Getting mentions of the business or individual on third-party sites that rank highly on Google.<ref name="cnet"/>
* Creating fake, positive reviews of the individual or business to counteract negative ones.<ref name="cnet"/>
* Using [[spambot]]s and [[denial-of-service attack]]s to force sites with damaging content off the web entirely.{{citation needed|date=December 2015}}
* [[Astroturfing]] third-party websites by creating anonymous accounts that create positive reviews or lash out against negative ones.<ref name="cnet"/>
* Proactively offering free products to prominent reviewers.<ref name="blob"/>
* Removing online [[mug shot]]s.<ref name="CNN.Com">{{cite news | url=http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/29/us/mug-shot-websites/ | title=Published mug shots: A constant reminder of one man's past | publisher=CNN.COM | access-date=27 September 2015}}</ref>
* Proactively responding to public criticism stemming from recent changes.<ref name="blob">{{cite news |last=Thompson |first=Nicholas |title=More Companies Pay Heed to Their 'Word of Mouse' Reputation |newspaper=The New York Times |date=June 23, 2003 |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/23/business/technology-more-companies-pay-heed-to-their-word-of-mouse-reputation.html?scp=1&sq=More+Companies+Pay+Heed+to+Their+%E2%80%98Word+of+Mouse%E2%80%99+Reputation&st=cse&pagewanted=all |access-date=July 13, 2012 }}</ref>
* [[Censorship|Removing or suppressing]] images that are embarrassing or violate copyright.
* [[Wikiturfing]], also called wikiwashing, in which corporations contact Wikipedia editors to remove allegedly incorrect information from the Wikipedia pages of businesses they represent, and "obfuscating... their role of profit seeking corporations...[and] promoting a misleading image of themselves associated with the general values of wikis and Wikipedia".<ref name="fortune">{{cite news |last=Holiday |first=Ryan |author-link=Ryan Holiday |title=How to solve your Wikipedia problem. |newspaper=Fortune |date=August 28, 2012 |url=http://fortune.com/2012/08/14/how-to-solve-your-wikipedia-problem-yes-you-have-one/ |access-date=November 30, 2015 }}</ref><ref>{{citation|author-link=Mayo Fuster Morell|last=Morell|first=M. F.|year=2011|title=The Unethics of Sharing: Wikiwashing|journal=International Review of Information Ethics|volume=15|number=9|pages=9–16|doi=10.29173/irie219}}</ref>
* Forbidding any comments