PR headache as law firm HR director falls foul of social media

You might have thought that by now we were all pretty clear on the pitfalls of social media and aware that posting things we would be very cautious about saying in the office was a bad idea.

Not everyone is on the same page however, and it was a surprise to see a senior HR professional and self-described “wellbeing ambassador” from city law firm CMS find himself in the national press following anti-Islamic and anti-transgender comments posted on X.

Dan Cooper, a prospective Reform UK councillor, described himself on his X profile as “Family man. Professional. Film Maker. Anti Islam. Only two genders. Pro UK farming. Reform candidate for Boston Coastal Lincolnshire.”

A prolific poster, his posts and comments referred to his hatred of Islam and denied the existence of islamophobia. He also posted offensive comments relating to transgender individuals and their parents and referred to immigration to the UK as an “invasion”.

Polarisation

In recent months X in particular has become home to more and more extreme views as Elon Musk’s right-wing rhetoric ramps up and those who don’t share those views decide to leave the platform in favour of Bluesky.

Emboldened by what appears to be a normalisation of extreme and sometimes racist comments which often go unchallenged, you can see why some individuals might not consider ramifications beyond the online world.

In this case, Mr Cooper did not reference his job in his profile. It was through a social media account called ‘Reform Party UK Exposed’ that the connection to his workplace was made, creating a legal PR headache for CMS with articles appearing in The Telegraph and The Times as well as many legal trade titles.

Damage limitation

The incident had the potential to damage the reputation of the firm as well as being unsettling for employees, particularly given the seniority of Mr Cooper and his role in HR. According to The Times, CMS responded by writing to the firm’s employees saying a staff member had expressed “offensive views on his social media accounts” and that the firm had taken “swift action”. The email from CMS’s chairman went on to say that Cooper’s views did “not represent those of the firm”.

Financial News reported that Mr Cooper had left CMS.

In its press statement, CMS said: “We took prompt and decisive action as soon as we learnt about the nature of the individual’s offensive remarks on social media.

“The views expressed on their personal social media accounts are their own and do not represent those of the firm.

“At CMS we are committed to creating an inclusive environment for all our colleagues and we will be supporting all the individuals affected by this.”

Handling communications

The incident is a reminder that the social media activities of staff continue to be a reputational risk to legal services organisations and is something that those working in legal PR need to have on their radar. CMS’s swift handling of the incident provides some good pointers on how best to respond.

Law firms reviewing the risk presented by social media or dealing with a staff incident should consider the following:

• Ensure you have up to date social media policies in place with guidance on what constitutes acceptable content. Make it clear that not referencing your firm or line of work will not be sufficient if your posts are in breach of the policy and can still be linked back to your workplace.
• Remind staff of these policies from time to time – most won’t go looking for the policy unless prompted.
• If a breach comes to light, act swiftly, taking action in relation to the individual involved. If it going to be in the press, be sure to communicate with staff as well as issuing a reactive media statement.
• Your statement should distance your organisation from the individual and their views as well as reiterating the firm’s values.
• Remember that stories that start off in trade media can quickly find their way into the national press if they hit the right buttons – even more reason to act quickly.
• Show the firm’s commitment to its values comes from the top – communications should come from senior leadership so that they are seen to be taken seriously and give staff reassurance that offensive or racist views are not tolerated.

Such situations will become trickier where views are not overtly racist or offensive. There are always grey areas and free speech considerations to take into account and the potential for a backlash if action is seen as too stringent.

Ultimately having a clear policy in place will make it easier to distinguish between personal views that are not relevant to an individual’s working life and those that move beyond red lines and risk causing upset to colleagues and reputational damage to your firm.