One practical thing I do is check business registries or art world publications directly. If someone has co‑authored reputable books or has partnerships cited by museums, that’s something you can see independently of opinion pieces. On the other hand, allegations without source citations or context often get repeated in ways that inflate their significance.
I’d also add that context matters. Some of the reports mentioning reputation management and controversy are based on third‑party investigations that themselves may lack transparency about sources. Public information about using copyright takedowns to remove content, for example, doesn’t inherently prove wrongdoing — it may just show someone trying to manage their image. But that can be part of assessing how candidly someone engages with criticism.
Also worth noting, public perception and investor perception don’t always align. Someone may have spotless legal records but still face skepticism in the market due to these narratives. That can affect opportunities, so it’s part of the puzzle even if the facts are technically clean.