Why Medium Should Be Transparent about Clone Phishing Attacks
Accounts are being spoofed, scammed and spammed…
Transparency is tantamount to truthfulness, as any professional communicator will tell you.
That’s why I’m surprised the editorial team of Medium continues to seemingly ignore what could be a larger trend of user accounts being targets of “clone phishing” scams (to cite the term quoted below under the subheading, “In Medium’s Defense”).
This cyber spoofing, scamming and spamming has been openly identified and discussed by ILLUMINATION Integrated Publications and others on Medium to promote protection, awareness and vigilance.
If you happen to be unaware of this problem and the actions needed by the community, you can learn more about it from three top editors of ILLUMINATION and ILLUMINATION-Curators: Chief Editor Dr Mehmet Yildiz, Aiden (Illumination Gaming) and Mike Broadly, DHSc (see their stories below).
And while I understand that there’s only so much Medium or any digital/social media platform/app can do to proactively prevent and remedy these attacks, there is one relatively easy step to take: Fostering greater transparency.
In fact, promoting transparency simply makes good business sense, as most savvy companies are aware. This is not “rocket science” but part of an effective communications strategy that benefits any big company.
Following are three main reasons why Medium could benefit by embracing transparency here to quell a potentially bigger problem (whether real or perceived):
- Transparency builds public trust.
- Transparency enhances brand loyalty.
- Transparency safeguards the brand image.
On the flipside, ignoring transparency does not make a problem go away. To the contrary, it usually causes the problem to fester.
Building Trust
Smart companies fully comprehend that transparency is an effective means of communication, both externally and internally, because it builds trust.
The result of cementing trust with an organization’s employees and stakeholders is a more satisfying experience for all parties, with the lone exception being for bad actors who are called out for misdeeds.
It’s beneficial for any company to recall that withholding key information from its users or letting it out piecemeal is never a good idea because it only detracts from a trustful relationship — not to mention possibly creating a crisis communications conundrum.
This is especially true of malicious cyber clone phishing schemes.
The result of a company trampling on transparency is the drip-drip-drip debacle as the problem spreads or goes public. This further erodes trust by failing to communicate quickly and comprehensively at the outset.
No company wants to be forced into “damage control” by regretting — in hindsight — to acknowledge and address these type of unfortunate developments ASAP. Stalling only results in a potential communications fiasco the longer the problem is ignored.
Trust is difficult to regain once lost. Moreover, sometimes losing public trust can be irreparable.
Fostering transparency involves being honest, open and forthcoming. This builds respect and goodwill in the short term, as well as a strong bond of trust over the long run.
Brand Loyalty
No company can expect its consumers to maintain their loyalty if they are being intentionally misled by the failure to disclose vital information that protects them.
A satisfying user experience is contingent upon a company being upfront and forthright, even when negative information must be conveyed for the greater good. Championing transparency results in greater integrity — which, in turn, enhances brand loyalty.
But the reverse is also true.
Customers cannot be expected to maintain loyalty to a product or service if it is believed they are being misled or deceived by the brand, whether intentionally or mistakenly.
Losing brand loyalty means losing customers, in addition to inflicting serious and avoidable damage to a company’s bottom line.
Brand Image
Brand loyalty is the close companion of brand image. Large employers spend countless millions of dollars through marketing and public relations to maintain and safeguard a positive brand image.
But lack of transparency is a sure way to jeopardize the brand image.
Damage to a company’s sacred brand image often results in not only the loss of time and effort required to build it, but also the increased costs directed at salvaging the initial favorable perception— that is, if possible, which is never a certainty.
Throughout modern history, many powerful leaders and companies have learned the hard lesson that “The cover-up is worse than the crime.”
This ominous adage grew out of the Watergate scandal during the American presidency of Richard Nixon, who was forced to resign in disgrace. The Washington Post’s investigative reporting at the time exposed the existence of the Watergate tapes, which then-President Nixon refused to release and allegedly tried to destroy.
As a result of the Watergate mess, nearly every public scandal now has the embarrassing word “gate” attached to it. If you happen to be unfamiliar with the events leading up to President Nixon’s downfall, then I recommend reading the best-selling book, “All the President’s Men” (or watching the movie of the same name).
While disregarding transparency might provide some perceived short-term gain for a leader or company, it comes at the expense of long-term pain if the truth is broadly disclosed by the news media — or goes viral on social media.
In Medium’s Defense
Perhaps by the time you read this story, Medium will have addressed this reported clone phishing scheme.
In this platform’s defense, a former Silicon Valley tech expert on Medium who worked as an “ethical hacker” told me the following (name withheld to protect anonymity):
- “Unfortunately, it’s not possible to completely prevent clone phishing on any platform.”
- “The high-risk finance apps do extra verification at the registration itself to prevent this. But for social apps, it’s really common to just have cloned accounts.”
- “But there are a couple of best practices — first and foremost is educating and spreading awareness among users to identify fake messages from clone accounts.”
- “Big organizations periodically do this, and Medium should at least boost articles related to these phishing attacks or publish their own. It costs nothing.”
- “Another best practice is to provide account verification badges for users who have more followers. Instagram already does this. It can be a slow process with backlogs but it’s worth it.”
“It’s not even a Medium-specific problem for them to feel uncomfortable with full disclosure. It’s a generic social platform problem.”
Final Thoughts
Being transparent shows the public that a company is operating in the spirit of truthfulness and good faith. Some might consider that as being a model corporate citizen.
That’s because, sometimes, even publicly responding to increasing allegations — which a company might rightfully dispute — can be better than saying nothing at all…
At least from a strategic communications perspective.
AUTHOR’S NOTE: I’m a consulting editor for ILLUMINATION Integrated Publications. You can learn more about me here.
