With the advent of social media Web sites permeating the business and legal world, the protection of brand reputation online is critical to long-term viability. How one goes about protecting its brand is a strategic decision that requires careful consideration of the potential benefits and drawbacks. The legal community, whether we want to believe it or not, is probably the worst responders to protecting brand reputation. What may seem like a sincere objection can turn into a public relations nightmare for the brash lawyers who think they can "sue their way out of" a negative online post.
Take for instance the Florida lawyer who recently sued Seattle-based attorney rating company, Avvo.com, over a poor rating he received from the upstart company. Rather than develop a strategic approach to protecting his brand reputation on the Internet, L. Joe David simply sued the company claiming, among other things, defamation. Now this otherwise obscure Florida lawyer has engaged the Court of the Internet Hate Machine (which can be more influential than most courts of law), and achieved a notoriety that most people, myself included, would want to avoid. In defense of their rating of Mr. David, Avvo.com CEO, Mark Britton, blogged:
"Someone get me a neck brace because, sadly, L. Joe David is swerving all over the legal road. For those who just joined, L. Joe (not to be confused with J. Lo) sued us a couple of weeks ago alleging we defamed him. Even though he had twice been found guilty of willfully refusing to pay court-ordered child support, failing to appear for his court dates and willfully obstructing the Florida Bar’s disciplinary process, L. Joe still felt our Avvo Rating of 3.7 “Caution” was not warranted. As confusing as that may sound, wait: it gets better.
Only weeks after filing his original complaint, Larry Joe is suddenly feeling that maybe Avvo isn’t defaming him, but rather we are now invading his privacy and violating the Florida adverting rules. And, possibly best of all, L. Joe is still complaining about things like Avvo getting his address wrong. I wonder if he has ever sued because Burger King forgot to hold the lettuce."
It’s not that I necessarily agree with the tactics of Mr. Britton, or Avvo.com’s rating formula, but clearly there are better ways of addressing an objection to ones brand reputation (which 9 lawyers have failed at) – suing for defamation is not one of them. I will be the first one to admit that defamation lawsuits are necessary, but only when careful consideration as to the relevancy of the suit is considered. If someone posts online (and this has probably happened) that I am a "complete idiot" (which may not be too far from the truth), a defamation lawsuit may not be the best course of action. One approach may be to counteract those negative objections by embracing them. A famous pizza company in San Francisco once countered negative online posts about its restaurant by having its waiters wear them on a shirt as they served patrons. The patrons thought it was an ingenious PR campaign, and based on the number of paying patrons, it was obvious that the negative comments were obsurd. No defamation lawsuit needed there, just some good old fashion strategic public relations.
Taking on the Internet Hate Machine is something that one should carefully consider when defending its brand reputation online.
