Scott Steinberg · Consultant, Analyst and Business Strategist
The field of real-world and online reputation management is an industry with real practitioners and a large fringe selling outcomes nobody can deliver. Disputes here can concern the vendor as well as the underlying statement: what was promised, what was performed, and what the client actually paid for. A consultant to 3000+ brands, Scott Steinberg provides context.
Expert reports, declarations, deposition and trial testimony on social media, real world and online reputation management, vendor conduct, suppression and content removal services, review solicitation practice, crisis commnications, response, reputation program measurement etc.
Slander, libel, defamatory statements, what harm it caused, crisis communications, corporate messaging and more.
Vendors in this category routinely promise removal, guaranteed suppression or specific search outcomes, none of which anyone controls.
Testimony addresses what was represented at sale, what the field knows about deliverability, and whether the promise was reasonable when made.
Suppression works by displacing unwanted results with content that ranks above them, which is slow, partial and reversible.
Testimony addresses what suppression campaigns actually achieved, what content was produced, and whether results held after the engagement ended.
Review programs range from legitimate solicitation to gating that filters unhappy customers out and, at the far end, fabricated reviews.
Testimony addresses solicitation practice standards, platform policy at the relevant time, and what the review record shows about generation methods.
Reputation vendors engaged during an active crisis face questions about response speed, strategy, channel selection and whether the intervention helped or amplified.
Testimony addresses crisis engagement practice and whether the approach taken was within the range a competent adviser would have recommended.
Vendors report on sentiment scores, result position and mention volume using methods that are frequently unverifiable and occasionally self-defined.
Testimony addresses what reported figures actually measured and whether the results presented to a client fairly represented the work.
Aggressive tactics include mass content networks, fraudulent removal requests, and manufactured entities created solely to occupy search positions.
Testimony addresses where tactics crossed from legitimate content production into manipulation, judged against practice standards at the time.
Engagement disputes examine what the agreement actually committed to, how results were defined, what happened at termination and whether suppression persisted afterward.
Testimony addresses contracting convention in the category and what the client reasonably understood they were buying.
The reputation industry has professional practitioners and a substantial fringe, and the distinction matters when assessing whether conduct was within accepted bounds.
Testimony establishes what competent practice looked like at the relevant time and where the vendor at issue sat against it.
Data can decay quickly, so early scoping determines what can later be shown. Any party may instruct.
Written opinions on areas ranging from PR and crisis communications to online reviews and social media comments.
Testimony on topics like what reputation work can and cannot achieve, which clients and juries may need input on.
Responsive analysis of suppression result claims, effectiveness assertions and program measurement.
Non-testifying review of records, online and social media comments, etc. plus discovery scoping.
Scott Steinberg is an analyst, consultant and business trends expert with over 25 years of experience providing management and strategic consulting services to more than 3,000 businesses and brands ranging from startups to government agencies and Fortune 500 firms.
He has testified in sample areas including intellectual property — copyrights, trademarks and patents — patent infringement, marketing, branding, video games, mobile applications, consumer product development, and the growth and monetization of online distribution platforms.
He is the author of over 30 books and has published more than five thousand articles addressing areas including but not limited to marketing, technology, leadership, innovation, advertising, digital transformation, data privacy and social networks. He appears regularly on ABC, CBS, CNN and NBC, and has led seminars and training programs for organizations including Wells Fargo, the PGA Tour, Century 21, Ford, Dell and Procter & Gamble.
His consulting work has been broadly recognized. He has served as a thought leader for the American Bar Association and Corporate Counsel magazine, and has received honors from the International Association for Scholastic Excellence, Fortune, and the 21st Century Icon Awards, among others.
Topics like slander, libel, defamatory statements, and the conduct of the reputation management industry: what vendors promised, what they performed, whether the techniques met accepted practice, and whether reported results reflected the work. It is a vendor and services practice rather than a defamation practice.
Defamation addresses the statement and the harm: reach, reputational damage, review manipulation as conduct, and damages. Other services provided tackle the industry that sells remediation: vendor promises, suppression services, review programs and crisis engagement conduct.
Rarely, and vendors selling guaranteed removal are selling something they do not control. Most work is suppression, which displaces results by ranking other content above them. It is slow, partial and reversible, and whether that was explained at the point of sale is a recurring issue.
Soliciting reviews from genuine customers is standard practice. Gating that routes unhappy customers away from public platforms sits in contested territory and violates several platforms' terms. Fabricated reviews are unambiguous. The applicable standard depends on the platform policy in force at the time.
Often by examining what actually changed in search results for the queries that mattered commercially, over what period, and whether it held after the engagement ended. Sentiment scores and mention volumes reported by vendors are frequently self-defined.
Initial conversations about scope, timing and conflicts are without charge. Helpful detail includes the vendor engagement or program at issue and the period involved, plus any expert disclosure deadline already set.
A conflicts check is run before any substantive discussion. An initial note listing the party names and a one-line description of the dispute is enough to start; please hold privileged or confidential material until the check clears.