Reputation crises no longer fade quietly. In a world of permanent digital records, algorithmic amplification, and AI-generated summaries, reputational harm can persist long after the facts evolve or the situation is resolved.
We are pleased to share a new whitepaper that addresses this reality head-on: “Reputation Repair in the Digital Age: Limits, Realities, and the Path to Recovery.”
Authored by four senior members of Reputation Advisors International, this paper reflects decades of collective experience advising organizations and individuals facing high-stakes reputational challenges. Reputation Advisors International is a global association of seasoned communications counselors operating in 16 cities worldwide, with deep expertise across crisis management, litigation and regulatory communications, brand positioning, and long-term reputation stewardship. Our members share a common view: reputation management is not a reactive exercise; it is a strategic discipline rooted in credibility, accountability, and sustained performance.
The whitepaper confronts one of the most common and most misunderstood questions we hear from clients, courts, and legal counsel: Can a reputation truly be “fixed” in today’s digital environment?
Our conclusion is clear and realistic: a damaged reputation cannot be erased—but it can be repaired. Meaningful recovery requires discipline, time, and a clear understanding of how trust is rebuilt in modern information ecosystems.
Written for business leaders, legal professionals, and trusted advisors, the whitepaper is grounded in real-world experience and proven methodologies. It is designed to set realistic expectations while offering a practical framework for recovery in an era defined by permanent digital memory and AI-driven narratives.
We invite you to read the paper and welcome the opportunity to discuss its insights and implications for your organization.
Crisis communications play a pivotal role in crisis management and are vital to preserving an organization’s operations and reputation. Crises can take many forms. The most obvious and dramatic crisis is an accident, terrorist attack or natural disaster, but investigative reporting, high-profile litigation, labor issues, hostile work environment claims, data breaches, death or serious injury to an employee are just some of the many other crises that can beset even the most well established and respected government agencies, companies or organizations.
Crises threaten to disrupt or destroy normal operations and to permanently tarnish in an instant the long and hard-earned reputation of any organization. As such, they must be planned for (as much as possible), prepared against, and, when they arise, dealt with swiftly, decisively and efficiently. EKA provides strategic counsel to clients on a range of issues, with a particular focus on reputation and crisis management, litigation support and financial communications.
We have provided crisis counsel and prepared crisis communications plans for clients across a broad spectrum of business, including food and beverage, transportation, healthcare (including hospital management and biotech), consumer products and heavy industries. We managed crises ranging from acts of terrorism, environmental disasters and product recalls to proxy battles, federal investigations, investigative media reports and board disputes.
EKA not only assists in managing crises; our work often starts long before that. We develop well-constructed plans that game out all angles and aspects in play before a crisis hits: from creating statements and holding them for potential situations to audience matrices that define the communications platforms to response and management procedures we refine down to the smallest practical detail. Our plans are always user-friendly. We encourage and help clients keep preparedness plans alive through regular updating training and simulation sessions.
EKA’s Reputation Management service covers the full spectrum of CEO and corporate reputation issues— from creating and maintaining an enduring reputation to recovering a reputation following a crisis. In an age of rising ethical standards and transparency expectations, our offering has become an increasingly vital part of an organization’s communications strategy.
Our CEO Reputation Management services are shaped by a deep understanding of the most critical drivers of CEO and company reputation and by the sophisticated strategies for improving both.
Our court-qualified expert witness testifies on behalf of major corporations in defamation, libel and slander cases across the country. Our experts are qualified to provide expert testimony on issues including, but not limited to, damaged images, reputational harm prevention and repair, and crisis communications. We are also defamation damage calculations experts. We have served as an expert witness for both plaintiffs and defendants in a wide variety of defamation/reputation cases throughout the United States. Despite the location and the type/nature of the defamation involved, there was one constant – the vital need for an expert witness for both the plaintiff and defendant.
Court cases involving defamation may occur over statements that have hindered a business, an individual’s career, reputation or general well-being. Increasingly, cases involve false statements on the internet or social media posts. While the lawyers prove that the statement and/or writing made are false, one of the challenges is determining the extent of damages that defamation has caused. EKA’s expert witness has years of experience testifying on the stand and brings meticulous preparation to every appearance. EKA has assisted attorneys to recover damages and ensure that their client’s reputation is repaired as much as possible given that false material is very difficult to remove from the internet. EKA has developed online reputation management campaigns to help victims repair the harm caused by defamation.
Slander and libel ruins lives
Very few people that serve on juries have the knowledge, background or understanding of the effect defamatory communication has on others. A lie can be halfway around the world before the truth ever gets out. We understand:
- The principles of negative communications
- The many ways false and negative information is spread
- Human nature and psychology and how information is absorbed and interpreted
- Strategies available for victims of defamation, slander & libel to take to counter the false information and the costs involved to repair the damage.
We testified as an expert witness in a defamation lawsuit brought by Fount Holland, a well-known Republican political consultant in Oklahoma, against Jarrin Jackson.
The lawsuit alleged that television, radio, and mail advertisements disseminated by Mr. Jackson contained “false, misleading, negligent/reckless, and/or malicious statements” about Mr. Holland. During the bench trial, we provided expert testimony on how these false accusations quickly spread across social media, intensifying negative perceptions of Mr. Holland and severely damaging his reputation. The court ruled in Mr. Holland’s favor, awarding him millions of dollars in damages—the exact amount we testified to on the cost of reputation repair—along with punitive damages.
We provided expert testimony in a precedent-setting case involving Courtney Love, who was sued for posting a tweet about her former attorney. This was the first trial in the United States involving allegations of defamation on Twitter (now X.com).
We provided expert witness testimony regarding crisis communication, media relations, and reputation management. After an eight-day trial, a jury decided that Courtney Love should not be held liable for a tweet directed at her former attorney Rhonda Holmes.
Our analysis included a detailed overview of the steps necessary for content removal and the cost of rehabilitating the doctor’s good name and businesses. We examined the impact and dissemination of the comments on social media websites and how those comments harmed the doctor’s professional reputation and economic condition. Our client won the case and was awarded the amount we recommended for rebuilding the doctor’s reputation.
The biggest initial challenge was to determine the scope of the recall in the face of incomplete information. Rose worked with the company CEO, legal counsel and sales team to assess the facts, substantiate the accuracy of information and subsequently relay that information in a concise and transparent to the public and other stakeholders. Rose drafted scripts for the company’s reference when assisting customers and drafted releases addressing both wholesale and consumer recalls. In the end, a full recall was avoided. An escalating crisis was halted within five days of the initial call.
A doctor sued two insurance companies after his patients began informing him that their pharmacists would no longer fill their prescriptions. Over six months the patients were being told (falsely) by the defendants that the doctor was a sanctioned provider by the federal government and unable to write prescriptions.
We were retained to address the effects of the dissemination of false information to the doctor’s professional reputation, to determine the appropriate standard of care/crisis response that should have taken place, and to provide an overview of action necessary to recover the doctor’s good professional reputation. A three-judge binding arbitration panel heard the case and they awarded our client $1.5 million dollars.
Two doctors sued a third doctor for damage to their reputation after the third doctor allegedly spread false and defamatory information to employees, patients, the community and the media. We were retained to address the effects of disseminating false information on the doctor’s and practice’s professional reputations.
We were asked to provide analysis and offer an opinion on the potential impact and damage to their image, examine the impacts to the practice as a result of the alleged acts and offer our expert opinion on the steps the plaintiffs should consider taking to recover their good professional reputation and lost business. The case is pending.
Two people were on a second story deck with a concrete patio below when without warning the deck gave way underneath, and they fell to the concrete patio below, where they suffered serious injuries. The injured people sued the manufacturer, the contractor, the wholesaler and the distributor.
We were retained by the distributor to provide analysis and offer an opinion regarding corporate communication, crisis management, the recall instructions. We offered our views on the reports of the other experts who attempted to shift the blame to the distributor. The day after our deposition, the case settled, and our client did not have to pay any damages.
An insurance agency sued another insurance agency and the CEO for defamation and tortious interference based on false and defamatory statements which defendants communicated to the plaintiff’s current and potential customers, with the intent of trying to convince those customers not to do business with the company.
The defendants allegedly repeatedly and intentionally communicated false statements to customers regarding the plaintiff’s business practices and the CEO publicly asserted false and defamatory communications with intent to harm our client’s reputation and interfere with current contractual and customer relationships. We were asked to provide analysis and offered an opinion on the potential impact and damage to our client’s reputation. We were also asked to offer an opinion regarding the steps our client should take in my opinion to repair the harm to its good professional reputation and to offer our professional opinion on damages associated with repairing the damage to our client’s professional reputation caused by the dissemination of the allegedly defamatory information. The Federal Court case settled in May 2018.
Our client and a female employee were celebrating at a company dinner. After the dinner, the female employee became intoxicated and exceedingly flirtatious with several males. Following dinner, the group broke up and our client eventually retired to his room.
The female employee perhaps embarrassed by her drunken displays and flirtatious behavior, concocted a false and defamatory story that evening about our client coming onto and propositioning her. She then spread malicious lies within the company about our client for the explicit purpose of retaliating and wrecking his reputation. We were asked to provide an analysis regarding the reputational harm to our client and to address the effects of disseminating false information. After a jury trial, our client was awarded $150,000.