Quantcast

Reviewer is being sued for 750K

INNspiring.com | Innkeeper Forum & Innkeeping Resources

Help Support INNspiring.com | Innkeeper Forum & Innkeeping Resources:

Arks

Well-known member
Joined
May 22, 2010
Messages
6,160
Reaction score
188

While we have free speech, you are not free to make stuff up in order to hurt someone's reputation. Libel and slander laws still exist, and may need to be beefed up to deal with this kind of stuff.
 

Generic

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2011
Messages
7,530
Reaction score
41
The problem here is that the reviewer went beyond what they knew for sure and what they perceived or thought, which is libel. It's one thing to say they did or didn't do x. It's another to suggest that they stole jewelry, when you have no proof, that crosses the line into libel, since it is unsubstantiated. (And if you are going to do it, then you should at least put in a police report, file a claim with your insurance, etc.)
There is another type of review that bothers me and that's the "me toos" or those who just have to add something even though they aren't involved. Or those who see a TV show and decide that they have a valid opinion, based on what they saw in a biased TV show. Having been in a TV show, I can tell you that even reality TV isn't as real as people think. Editting can make things look entirely different.
And how valid is your opinion of "I won't do business because I heard from x that...". It's not a real review and will eventually be removed. I saw the same thing of a restaurant in Ottawa where the owner was found to have stalked a reviewer.
 

gillumhouse

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Supporting Member
Joined
May 22, 2008
Messages
15,609
Reaction score
214

While we have free speech, you are not free to make stuff up in order to hurt someone's reputation. Libel and slander laws still exist, and may need to be beefed up to deal with this kind of stuff..
And then you have ignoramouses like the one who commented on the article - I would never use them because suing a reviewer does not show good customer service..............
Huh? Obviously not someone in business and not a bright bulb. Had the review just been about the workmanship, timing, just work related, the company would not have a leg to sue on,. but the review said more.
 

Joey Camb

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 2, 2010
Messages
4,793
Reaction score
0
The problem here is that the reviewer went beyond what they knew for sure and what they perceived or thought, which is libel. It's one thing to say they did or didn't do x. It's another to suggest that they stole jewelry, when you have no proof, that crosses the line into libel, since it is unsubstantiated. (And if you are going to do it, then you should at least put in a police report, file a claim with your insurance, etc.)
There is another type of review that bothers me and that's the "me toos" or those who just have to add something even though they aren't involved. Or those who see a TV show and decide that they have a valid opinion, based on what they saw in a biased TV show. Having been in a TV show, I can tell you that even reality TV isn't as real as people think. Editting can make things look entirely different.
And how valid is your opinion of "I won't do business because I heard from x that...". It's not a real review and will eventually be removed. I saw the same thing of a restaurant in Ottawa where the owner was found to have stalked a reviewer..
in this country we have had problems with this tv review thing with hotel inspector, 3 in a bed and 4 in a bed - people watch the show (and say so) and then do a review! sorry but that is not on.
 

Generic

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2011
Messages
7,530
Reaction score
41
The problem here is that the reviewer went beyond what they knew for sure and what they perceived or thought, which is libel. It's one thing to say they did or didn't do x. It's another to suggest that they stole jewelry, when you have no proof, that crosses the line into libel, since it is unsubstantiated. (And if you are going to do it, then you should at least put in a police report, file a claim with your insurance, etc.)
There is another type of review that bothers me and that's the "me toos" or those who just have to add something even though they aren't involved. Or those who see a TV show and decide that they have a valid opinion, based on what they saw in a biased TV show. Having been in a TV show, I can tell you that even reality TV isn't as real as people think. Editting can make things look entirely different.
And how valid is your opinion of "I won't do business because I heard from x that...". It's not a real review and will eventually be removed. I saw the same thing of a restaurant in Ottawa where the owner was found to have stalked a reviewer..
in this country we have had problems with this tv review thing with hotel inspector, 3 in a bed and 4 in a bed - people watch the show (and say so) and then do a review! sorry but that is not on.
.
Exactly my point. They do the same thing here based on TV shows, based on newspaper articles.
This article http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/story/2012/11/16/ottawa-restaurant-owner-sentenced-90-days-for-libel.html
The reviews for both of her restaurants on Y3lp and TA were full of nasty comments for quite some time. There are still a few that are more than questionable.
As much as the owner was wrong, that doesn't give other people the right to cyberbully her or her staff. That they can't see what they are doing that is wrong is exactly the point. A review should have the impartiality of talking about the food and their personal experience. Not based on third party experience.
 
Top