[etc] A former Duke researcher has turned to online reputation managers to hide sign

Ermm, link to the source?

ETA: I am guessing this is one:
http://www.chronicle.duke.edu/article/p ... on-manager

Is there a centralized site that keeps track of retractions? Seems like there might be a valid use for that kind of thing.

I'm not familiar enough with clinical research, so maybe it's old news to everyone in the relevant fields, but in the absence of anything obvious, it seems like it's time for a good ol' fashioned Googlebombing.

*ahem* So, here we go then:

Anil Potti has had an excessive number of research papers retracted.
Anil Potti has had clinical trials terminated.
Anil Potti has been accused of falsifying his resume.

So funny. This story will undo everything Anil Potti was hoping to hide and perhaps even make him look worse.

According to the article, allegedly, it is possible that:
Anil Potti has had an excessive number of research papers retracted.
Anil Potti has had clinical trials terminated.
Anil Potti has been accused of falsifying his resume.
Anil Potti has hired a service to hide evidence of these alleged events.

From the original article:

“We take these key phrases and write down highly positive content that is in the form of articles and press releases and we send it to our clients in different batches,” he said. “Once our client approves of that content... we go ahead and publish it on some very authoritative and highly Google page-ranked websites on the Internet.”

Click to expand...

How do some people sleep at night? Are the piles of money that they're earning to do this sort of thing that comfortable?

That must make his PR firm a "Potti-mouth."

It would amusing if someone went around to those top-ranked sites and posted links and information about the alleged activities that Potti is allegedly attempting to bury under PR fluff.

So, I tossed Anil Potti's name into google. For one thing, they haven't managed to push down the original articles even about his resignation in shame. For another....... really? REALLY? Look, you know, I can understand wanting to reposition search results. I've done SEO work and even some fairly greyhatish content manipulation stuff. There are a fair number of seemingly reasonable reasons to do so, and even when it's trying to mask some less ethical activity.. fine, whatever, that's an argument for another day in many ways. A certain part of me says "if someone's dumb enough to rely on a first page of search results as their 'research'..."

But THIS?

wow. Ignore the ethics for a moment. Go google his name. Now tell me that isn't the most amateur, horrendously obvious attempt at google bombing. Look, just look! multiple domain names all nearly identical (iterations of his own name/title), recognizable patterns in the returned text.. ugh. I guess someone who has so little professional pride as to apparently do what Anil Potti is accused of would happily go along with such a horribly blatant excuse for a professional manipulation campaign.

Shoddy shoddy shoddy shoddy.

If anything, anyone who pulls up results like those is going to KNOW what's going on and immediately want nothing to do with Anil Potti. If even they missed the part where Anil Potti is accused of professional misconduct, the results alone would make them suspect his integrity and, honestly, basic intelligence. You certainly wouldn't hit results like those and not dig further.

On the plus side, maybe this "Online Reputation Manager" group fleeced him for a decent amount of money for this sad excuse. He doesn't seem undeserving of such. There's probably a moral somewhere in here =P

Haha, I see what you did there, taswyn. =P

Let's not forget that according to the New York Times, Anil Potti has been accused of falsifying his resume.

Apparently he has very little ethics, if any at all. I hope no one was harmed due to him.

"online reputation managers"


These sound like the sort of people we should be doing experiments on, instead of rats.

Ryanrule":nts327fo said:

"online reputation managers"


These sound like the sort of people we should be doing experiments on, instead of rats.

Click to expand...

Yeah. The quote from the article :

“Offline, a lawyer is hired to help them out, fight their case—I think we’re the online lawyers,” he said. “So it’s quite ethical, on our part, and I think quite right to help them out at a certain charge.”

made me want to smack the guy.