If your brand is online, it's susceptible to consumer influence -- both benign and malicious. See what steps your company can take to mitigate the risks.

With the swift rise in social software enabling a global audience to broadcast multimedia messages to one another, companies are being challenged to use social tools to protect their brands, retain their messages, monitor their reputations and cultivate trust amongst consumers. 

The threat of brand-jacking -- through such efforts as activist videos, masquerading social accounts and harmful direct-to-consumer fraud -- demands that companies be both ever-vigilant of their online presence and that they respond quickly, creatively and honestly. Meanwhile, there is also opportunity in brand-jacking -- the opportunity to adapt messages to new technologies and create meaningful dialogue with consumers.

Let's explore the emerging challenges of third-parties using a company's brand against itself, and look at the steps companies can take to communicate better with their customers, which can mitigate the risks of brand-jacking. 

What is brand-jacking?
A recent case exemplifies what brand-jacking is and the inherent danger it presents:  ExxonMobil was put on the defensive after a Twitter account surfaced acting as a voice for the oil and gas giant. The Twitter user, "Janet at ExxonMobil (ExxonMobilCorp)" used the popular -- and public -- short messaging service to address weighty issues facing ExxonMobil, from global warming to defenses of company reaction to the Exxon Valdez spill. At the time, Janet was an active voice, engaging users in dialogues, answering questions and even being picked up by industry bloggers as an example of a corporation taking an early step towards adopting a new technology.

The problem was "Janet" was not an employee at ExxonMobil. ExxonMobil had been brand-jacked. Exxon acted quickly to discuss the case with the media, but damage to the ExxonMobil brand had already been done: off-brand messages and opinions -- completely out of the control of corporate stakeholders -- were being picked up by a global community. 

One of the reasons the false Exxon Mobil Twitter account was so problematic was that it followed other brands' adoption of Twitter, like Southwest Airlines and Comcast, whose activities captured the attention of mainstream media, such as The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal and The Washington Post. Thus, it seemed reasonable that Janet at ExxonMobil was an actual voice of the company, rather than someone taking advantage of an industry trend that Exxon Mobil had overlooked.

How can a brand protect itself?
In today's always-on, global-reach digital environment, it might be fair to say there is no way that brand-jacking can be completely avoided. Creating accounts at all possible social applications using all possible permutations of brand-based user names will quickly become an exercise in futility.

There are, however, several general ways you can reduce the threat, and even adapt a brand's behavior to engage with your users:

Be honest and consistent in your messages. Often, brand-jacking arises from people wishing to make a statement about your brand or to fraudulently spread disinformation by co-opting its identity. Real or perceived concerns about a company's global and social activities flash around the world in the blink of an eye or the posting of a news article.  A brand should consistently put forth a clear, honest and socially responsible message, which will allow consumers to understand a brand's position and identify off-message usage.

The example of Janet at ExxonMobil hints at larger issues surrounding the public perception of Exxon Mobil Corp., including some charges of international human rights violations. To some, there have been inconsistent messages from Exxon Mobil, and this lack of trust may create a desire to undermine the brand in order to voice opinions.

Create a dialogue. Companies can use social media to secure trusted identities and to initiate a dialogue between the brand and the public. This communication can showcase the human voices behind the brand, solidify the brand message and prove to the public that their opinions and ideas are welcome. 

For instance, Whole Foods and JetBlue have Twitter accounts that, in addition to being sales tools, feature personal replies, events of interest and non-business news relevant to their audience's interests. Other brands, like Marriott, Dell and General Motors, use corporate blogs to communicate with the public.

Be aware of your brand online. Connected consumers operate in a zero-time information cycle. Corporate activity, especially negative behaviors, will reverberate within a large population in a short period of time. Since many brand-jacking instances are reactions to perceived negative corporate behavior, brands must monitor both their own activities, and the reactions of a global audience.

Brands can use active methods of monitoring social applications to uncover concrete examples of unauthorized brand use. Monitoring can also act as an early-detection system to uncover trends such as an uptick in negative discussions, which may indicate unforeseen problems.

There are many ways to monitor a brand:

• Following terms mentioned in news articles, blogs, forum discussions, etc.
• Do-it-yourself solutions like Google or Yahoo alerts, Technorati searches, custom searches (such as Rollyo) and feeds or SEO
• Monitoring suites such as Rapleaf, Monitor This, or Particls
• Robust reputation management tools such as Naymz, Trackur, Copernic Tracker or AttenAlert
• Social searches or tools (such as Serph, Twitscoop, Socialmention or Keotag) to monitor social networks and applications, lifestreams and other types of user-generated content.

Be responsive. When issues arise, brands can benefit from a timely, leveled and fair response, versus a potentially overbearing use of lawyers and threats. 

A good first response is to initiate a "goodwill" communication directly with the person(s) misusing the brand, as well as the technology provider. Exxon Mobil Corp., for instance, attempted to communicate directly with the owner of the "Janet at ExxonMobil" Twitter account, while also working with Twitter's co-founder,  Biz Stone, to uphold their copyrights.

In addition to giving a leveled response, companies can benefit from communicating in the language of the medium. Earlier this year, a YouTube video surfaced showing a glitch in EA Sports' Tiger Woods '09 golf video game. The captured bug depicted a ball being hit onto (instead of into) a water hazard, allowing a game character to walk on the water to play it. EA responded to this potentially damaging press by releasing a video of their own, humorously portraying this not a quality-issue in the game, but rather that Tiger Woods is so good that he can, indeed, walk on water. This response was quickly picked up as clever and responsive to users, and raised additional awareness of the game in the process.

Conclusion
The reach and ease of use of social applications have given a global audience unprecedented access an instantaneous communication. Challenges facing brands have never been greater, but the savvy company need not circle the wagons and hide from social media and the consumer hoard. Creating a cohesive, consistent, and socially responsible brand message, monitoring discussions, and fostering a nimble, honest and meaningful dialogue with consumers can benefit any brand, jacked or not.

Tim Lynch is senior experience design specialist at Molecular.