Summary:
- I am increasingly receiving requests from organizations seeking urgent assistance to remove viral social media posts causing reputational and brand damage.
- Any organization can be targeted, and viral content now spreads faster than companies can react.
- Takedown strategies must be swift, strategic, and tailored to the specific creator and situation.
- Preparation—tabletops, runbooks, and aligned communications—is essential to reducing reputational harm.
When I returned to Big Law after serving as cybersecurity counsel at ByteDance/TikTok USDS—a role I genuinely loved and remain deeply proud of—I assumed most of my practice would be devoted to traditional incident response and helping organizations build strong cybersecurity programs. While that work remains central, a surprising trend has emerged: More and more companies, nonprofits, and individuals are coming to me for help removing harmful social media posts and addressing the fallout from viral content that paints them in a negative or outright incorrect light.
The questions I’m asked are remarkably consistent: What actually happens when a video goes viral? What can be done when it does? And most importantly, is there any way to prepare before crisis hits?
This article tackles each of those questions head‑on.
What Actually Happens When a Video Goes Viral?
In today’s digital environment, social media influencers make entire careers out of capturing attention. They post across multiple platforms—Instagram, TikTok, X, Discord, YouTube—and a single video can (and usually does) spread simultaneously in five or six places. What looks like “one viral post” is often dozens of copies, reposts, or spin‑offs circulating at the same time.
Some of the situations I am seeing involve disgruntled employees airing internal grievances or discussing trade secrets on podcasts. Others stem from influencer‑sponsored videos where individuals, often unknowingly, participate in content that harms their reputation. And increasingly, with AI tools that are inexpensive and widely available, influencers and content creators are using artificial intelligence to impersonate companies or executives, creating statements that are false, misleading, or deeply damaging.
It’s important to understand the underlying incentives. Viral content is monetized. Controversy drives engagement, and engagement drives revenue. Content that goes viral often does so precisely because it is inflammatory, dramatic, or unflattering. So, when organizations or individuals first see themselves misrepresented online, it is common for panic to set in—not only because the content is harmful, but because it is replicating faster than they can track.
What Can Be Done Once a Post Goes Viral?
To remove a post, the first step I take is to examine the platform’s community guidelines. Every major platform maintains detailed rules governing what users can post, usually covering harassment, impersonation, privacy violations, misinformation, and other restricted content.
Behind those rules is a large and often unseen (and under‑appreciated) Trust & Safety infrastructure. During my time at ByteDance/TikTok USDS, I worked closely with the teams responsible for reviewing flagged content—both materials identified by internal systems and reports submitted by users. I am very proud of the work they did. In general, these teams work tirelessly, around the clock, with an extraordinary level of dedication to keeping platforms safe.
But the reality is that with millions of videos uploaded every single day, there is an enormous queue, and it becomes critically important to get your issue in front of the right decision‑makers as quickly as possible—essentially, to “move to the front of the line” for review.
To maximize the chance of timely removal in my practice now, we prepare a detailed takedown request that clearly outlines the guideline violation and ensures it reaches those decision‑makers promptly. When a video genuinely violates platform rules, platforms tend to act efficiently.
However, not all harmful content violates those rules. A significant amount falls into the category of “personal opinion,” which platforms explicitly allow, especially when directed at companies or their leadership. When that happens, our strategy shifts to direct legal notice. We may identify the poster’s publicly available contact information and issue a cease‑and‑desist letter. Many individuals voluntarily remove content once they understand the legal implications and potential exposure.
But this approach requires judgment. Influencers in particular are accustomed to controversy and they monetize it. A legal letter may not deter them; it may energize them. I’ve seen cease‑and‑desist letters become the subject of a new video, one that criticizes the company’s response and generates even more engagement. For some creators, conflict is revenue.
Because of this, deciding whether to send a cease‑and‑desist requires careful assessment: the influencer’s posting history, their likelihood of escalating, whether they’ve been sued before, the level of harm caused by the video, and the overall persona they project in their broader content. Sometimes, the most strategic move is restraint.
When a harmful video is sponsored by another company, or created at their request, we often pursue a different path: contacting the sponsoring organization directly. These communications—typically sent to the General Counsel or Chief Communications Officer—outline the legal risks, reputational exposure, and potential consequences of continuing to support or promote the content. Sponsors tend to be far more risk‑averse than influencers, and they often act quickly and quietly.
Ultimately, choosing the right approach or combination of approaches is highly situational. What remains constant is the need for speed. Rapid action helps contain reputational damage, but the strategy must also align with the organization’s goals. Some companies want to send a strong internal signal about the consequences of public disparagement. Others prioritize avoiding unnecessary amplification. Each incident requires a tailored response that balances legal strategy, public perception, platform dynamics, and the realities of today’s influencer‑driven ecosystem.
How Can Organizations Prepare Before the Next Viral Hit?
The question I’m hearing more and more is how to prepare before a crisis occurs. With AI‑generated content, deepfakes, and influencer‑driven narratives becoming commonplace, it’s no longer a matter of if an organization will face a viral hit—it’s a matter of when. Preparation is often the difference between a manageable incident and a true brand‑level emergency.
One of the most effective ways to stay ahead is to incorporate social‑media‑driven incidents into tabletop exercises. For example, I am helping organizations practice how they would respond to a deepfake video of a CEO, an AI‑generated impersonation of a nonprofit spokesperson, or an employee publicly disparaging the organization or discussing trade secrets or confidential information. These simulations help leadership, legal teams, and communications teams understand their roles and move quickly when the real thing happens.
It can also be tremendously valuable to involve a member of the board—particularly when cybersecurity oversight sits with the audit or technology committee. Board participation signals that the organization takes these threats seriously and gives directors firsthand insight into how fast viral content moves, the reputational stakes involved, and the resourcing required for an effective response. In this way, tabletop exercises are not just training tools; they are governance tools that help align leadership with the realities of today’s digital threat landscape.
Another important step is incorporating a takedown plan into your incident response framework. This does not mean pre‑analyzing every platform’s community guidelines—those change constantly and such an effort would be impractical. Instead, your runbook should outline who is involved and how decisions get made. Who handles internal and external communications? Who is the designated legal point of contact? (I’m always happy to raise my hand for that role.) Who coordinates with HR, IT, or the executive team? Defining these roles ahead of time and practicing them during tabletop exercises is far more valuable than attempting to script every potential scenario.
Finally, many videos we see involve current or former employees making disparaging allegations or sharing confidential information on influencer channels or podcasts. While I am not an employment attorney and do not pretend to be one, strong language in employee handbooks, confidentiality agreements, nondisclosure obligations, and anti‑disparagement provisions can be powerful tools when issuing cease‑and‑desist letters. If an organization is concerned about employee statements becoming public online, ensuring these provisions are clear, current, and enforceable can make a meaningful difference in how effectively we can respond.
Conclusion
If your organization is dealing with harmful or misleading viral content or wants to create a proactive plan before it faces one, feel free to reach out. The tools exist, the strategies are effective, and with the right preparation, these incidents don’t have to turn into crises.
