It would be impossible for a law firm -or indeed any organisation – to permanently avoid being dragged into the headlines as a result of the dubious actions of an employee. Whether it's down to the fraudulent or other criminal exploits of a member of staff, or more titillating but less grave cases involving morally questionable behaviour, most firms are likely to come to the attention of the general public at some point for something other than their legal work. As Clifford Chance (CC) knows full well, thanks to bitter recent experience, the huge increase in social media usage by employees significantly raises the stakes.

The good news for CC is that, while trainee Aysh Chaudhry's recent pro-Islamic YouTube rant in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris attracted a tidal wave of adverse press comment across the UK and elsewhere in the world, in the longer term the damage is likely to be pretty minimal. As Legalweek.com's lead feature this week finds, while CC will have taken a short-term reputational hit from the affair, fallout from an economic crisis at a law firm is likely to be far more damaging in the long term.

True, the offending video arguably raises questions about the firm's graduate recruitment choices, but there is no suggestion that CC has actually done anything wrong. The fact it has so far stood by its trainee may have proved unpopular in some quarters, but it is no bad thing given that, as a law firm, CC needs to be seen to respect employment rights.

But that doesn't mean firms should ignore the threat posed by social media. Not only are employees more likely than ever to share aspects of internal corporate communication externally, the very fact that law firms deal in the law makes them ripe targets for headline writers.

This means tightening up – or in some cases putting in place – social media policies that strike a balance between encouraging employees to have a voice in social media and safeguarding the reputation of the firm. This could mean an increase in the disciplinary options available in the event of a breach of the guidelines. And, if they are not already doing it, firms should be systematically vetting candidates' social media activities at the recruitment stage.

It is a tightrope that firms must walk and the challenge will only increase as social media becomes more and more ingrained into the lives of successive generations of law graduates.