ITMR reputation crisis board
Assess reputation crises, reviews and press inquiries
This checker helps companies, start-ups, agencies, platform operators, management and publicly visible individuals to sort out an acute reputation situation legally and in terms of communication: what is visible, which statements can be challenged, which evidence is missing, which deadlines or platform channels count and which response should be prepared? This applies to negative reviews and press inquiries as well as to social media attacks.
Short profile
How the board helps in practice
The board does not replace a review of the individual case, but it prepares a reliable initial assessment. It separates public visibility, legal points of attack, evidence, communication risk and escalation pressure. From this, it derives a risk level, immediate measures, typical documents and a copyable short overview for your inquiry to ITMR.
Crisis Command Board
Situation picture: signal, evidence, law and response
The graphic shows the typical course of a reputation crisis: secure first, then assess, and only then communicate or escalate legally. The situation picture updates once the questionnaire is completed.
Orientation
Five steps before reacting publicly
Document URLs, screenshots, PDF print, profile, date, time, comments, shares and context.
Separate factual claims, opinions, suspicions, quotes, images, reviews, platform rules and data protection allegations.
Record ranking, visibility, platform, audience, repetitions, media interest and economic damage.
No spontaneous justification. First clarify responsibility, spokesperson role, tone and legal approval.
Review platform notice, lawyer's letter, counterstatement, injunction, correction, de-escalation or monitoring.
What this check does
Initial sorting for legal and communications crises
Reputation cases often affect several levels at once: the law on statements, personality rights, image rights, platform rules and DSA notice channels, unfair competition law for competitor attacks, data protection for data allegations, trade secrets, press communication and evidence preservation for proceedings. The checker prioritises these levels for the next decision.
Which cases is the board intended for?
For negative reviews, reputation-damaging posts, press inquiries, online reports, platform notices, public allegations, competitor attacks, conflicts with employees or former employees, data protection or security allegations and situations in which communication and law interact closely.
What are typical legal interfaces?
Typical are injunctions, removal, correction, counterstatement, retraction, platform complaints, notice-and-action, evidence preservation for interim relief, data protection review, image rights review, unfair competition law for competitor attacks and DSA processes for platforms.
Where are the limits?
The checker does not give a binding assessment of the prospects of success. Whether a statement is permissible depends on the exact wording, context, evidence, public interest, the person affected, platform rules and possible deadlines.
Which documents are particularly important?
Particularly important are the original URL, screenshot/PDF with date and time, profile or account data, full context, previous communication, press inquiries, platform tickets, internal approvals, counter-evidence, reach data and a short chronology.
Interactive check
Record the crisis situation
Answer the following steps. The result is a structured preliminary review with risk level, priority, reasons, next review points and documents to prepare.
Preliminary result
Crisis situation not yet calculated
The structured assessment appears here once the questionnaire is completed.
Reasons for the assessment
Recommended next review points
Documents worth preparing
Copyable short overview for your inquiry
Risks, deadlines and measures
Typical crisis signals and first response
| Signal | Typical relevance | First measure |
|---|---|---|
| Negative review or portal post | Check customer status, factual core, opinion, abusive criticism, platform rules and provability. | Secure the review with URL, profile, date, time, text, stars and history; compile counter-evidence. |
| Press inquiry or online report | Press law, suspicion-based reporting, quotes, counterstatement, correction, injunction and deadline strategy may be relevant. | Secure the inquiry, list of questions and deadline; no spontaneous statement without an agreed response line. |
| Social media post going viral | Visibility, reposts, comments, platform rules, personality rights, image rights and communication risk rise quickly. | Document the original and its spread; start monitoring; have the public response approved legally and in terms of communication. |
| Platform notice, suspension or marketplace conflict | DSA and platform processes, notice-and-action, complaint channels, trader traceability and economic damage may be affected. | Secure ticket numbers, notice texts, platform decisions, product/account data and revenue consequences. |
| Data protection or security allegation | GDPR/TDDDG, data breach review, data subject rights, communication with authorities and reputation interact. A genuine personal data breach can trigger a 72-hour review. | Separate the facts: allegation, data actually affected, systems, log data, recipients, risk analysis and previous communication. |
| Competitor attack or public criticism of claims | Unfair competition law, trade secrets, trademark/IP relevance, misleading statements, evidence dossiers and interim relief may play a role. | Document statements, evidence, campaign material, reach, infringer data and repetitions. |
Sensible next steps
Related ITMR checkers and follow-up reviews
Discuss your reputation situation with ITMR
Briefly describe what was published, where it is visible, whether deadlines are running and which goal you are pursuing. Attach existing screenshots, links, press inquiries, platform tickets and counter-evidence directly where possible.
Send your crisis inquiry to ITMRNote: This checker serves as an initial orientation and does not replace legal advice. Especially for press, reviews, social media, platform notices, data protection allegations or interim relief, the assessment depends on the specific wording, context and evidence. How we proceed legally and in terms of communication in reputation crises is described on our pages Hate speech & reputation protection and Press law.