If you are running a business, advocating for a policy viewpoint, or running for political office, there’s a decent chance you may be confronted with rumors online that are potentially damaging to your reputation.

The sub-head on this piece from The Economist sums up an effective response quite nicely: “Denial is useless. Spread happy truths instead ”

The piece goes on to take apart Coke’s handling of chronic rumors about its operations in the Middle East.

Citing research by psychologists from the Kellogg School of Management and Stanford business school on the potential damage you can do to yourself by repeating a rumor in an attempt to knock it down, the piece goes on to offer this advice:

Instead of denying false rumours, a company should put out a stream of positive messages about itself, reckon Mr Rucker and Mr Dubois. This deprives myths of oxygen and also nudges people to doubt nasty things they may hear about the company in question.

The straightforward bottom line: In online crises, as in life, when you are in the middle of trying times, it pays to have friends.

So how do you think this applies to political campaigns, where current doctrine–dating back to the Clinton campaign–dictates that no attack goes without a response?  Is this reseach consistent or inconsistent with that view?  Or is it time to develop more complex strategies in that regard?