Tripadvisor Could Face Legal Action
In what would be a staggering disregard for freedom of speech, a reputation management company is launching a ‘group defamation action’ against Tripadvisor on behalf of thousands of hotels in arguement against negative reviews. Stating that negative reviews are ‘defamatory’, KwikChex.com say they are prepared to fight to save the reputations of thousands of establishments.
We’re struggling to see how this is going to stand up in court, as Tripadvisor is equally ‘defamatory’ to all hotels regardless of ownership. There is also the tiny matter of positive reviews. If a hotel is good then it will get a positive review, if it is poor then it will get slated. And quite rightly too.
We have to put up with far too much average service in modern society – our consumption of budget services has seen general standards drop.
Anyway, We would be surprised if this turned out to be more than a PR stunt by KwikChex.
Edit: Kwikchex has replied to this post below (see comments) stating this is not about bad reviews, but ammended reviews and comments out of context…. Read the full comment below
The case is not against freedom of speech or getting rid of “bad” reviews. It is against false and malicious reviews. Not all reviews on TA are by real people with real grievances – there are plenty of fakes, too (though they are the minority). Just because most are valid doesn’t mean a hotel has to put up with fake malicious fake reviews. That’s what the case is about.
Hi Phil. This comment gives a better argument than the Kwikchex response below (which is ambiguous to say the least) and it would be worrying if a large amount of fake reviews were allowed through. I’d agree that, while some fake reviews are always going to come through, steps to combat it must be taken to protect those involved.
We use aggregated reviews from that come from post stay feedback from paying customers to try and avoid fake reviews. However this can only be done with full cooperation (and trust) from tour operators.
A selection of unverfiied reviews can be read but are clearly marked as such.
The case is not against freedom of speech or getting rid of “bad” reviews. It is against false and malicious reviews. Not all reviews on TA are by real people with real grievances – there are plenty of fakes, too (though they are the minority). Just because most are valid doesn’t mean a hotel has to put up with fake malicious fake reviews. That’s what the case is about.
Hi Phil. This comment gives a better argument than the Kwikchex response below (which is ambiguous to say the least) and it would be worrying if a large amount of fake reviews were allowed through. I’d agree that, while some fake reviews are always going to come through, steps to combat it must be taken to protect those involved.
We use aggregated reviews from that come from post stay feedback from paying customers to try and avoid fake reviews. However this can only be done with full cooperation (and trust) from tour operators.
A selection of unverfiied reviews can be read but are clearly marked as such.
As we have posted elsewhere , we support consumer feedback wholeheartedly. We recommend transparency via reviews to our members / clients – but our system does authenticate such feedback as being from genuine customers. To clarify though, the reason for this action against TripAdvisor, what provoked it was not good or bad reviews per se, or even whether they could be trusted. The reason was that TripAdvisor had added comments to individual reviews both on their website and in emails to members that were not in context and that would almost certainly create a negative, unjustifiable perspective.
In a recent article concerning our action, Jack Lerner, a professor at the University of Southern California Law School commented ‘The law would not protect sites that edit the substance of a user’s comment or that induce the content.‘
In all cases that we are dealing with, the hotels actually had a positive rating on TA, so it is not a question of bad hotels complaining about warranted negative reviews. It is very far from a ‘PR stunt’ and not a path that we wished to go down and wouldn’t have done so without expert advice and if it were not for the difficulty in achieving remedial action in any other way. We genuinely hope that TripAdvisor will participate in creating a more honest, fair and verifiable way to get opinion to the public – and protect reputable businesses. Chris Emmins, KwikChex.com
Playing devils advocate here, have reviews actually been edited to change context , or have reviews been amended with clearly labelled comments?
Having used Tripadvisor many times I cannot recall seeing anything approaching opinion coming directly from them. It would be interesting to see some examples of this and how common it is.
Also – “what provoked it was not good or bad reviews per se, or even whether they could be trusted” – so basically you can trust the reviews on there?
As we have posted elsewhere , we support consumer feedback wholeheartedly. We recommend transparency via reviews to our members / clients – but our system does authenticate such feedback as being from genuine customers. To clarify though, the reason for this action against TripAdvisor, what provoked it was not good or bad reviews per se, or even whether they could be trusted. The reason was that TripAdvisor had added comments to individual reviews both on their website and in emails to members that were not in context and that would almost certainly create a negative, unjustifiable perspective.
In a recent article concerning our action, Jack Lerner, a professor at the University of Southern California Law School commented ‘The law would not protect sites that edit the substance of a user’s comment or that induce the content.‘
In all cases that we are dealing with, the hotels actually had a positive rating on TA, so it is not a question of bad hotels complaining about warranted negative reviews. It is very far from a ‘PR stunt’ and not a path that we wished to go down and wouldn’t have done so without expert advice and if it were not for the difficulty in achieving remedial action in any other way. We genuinely hope that TripAdvisor will participate in creating a more honest, fair and verifiable way to get opinion to the public – and protect reputable businesses. Chris Emmins, KwikChex.com
Playing devils advocate here, have reviews actually been edited to change context , or have reviews been amended with clearly labelled comments?
Having used Tripadvisor many times I cannot recall seeing anything approaching opinion coming directly from them. It would be interesting to see some examples of this and how common it is.
Also – “what provoked it was not good or bad reviews per se, or even whether they could be trusted” – so basically you can trust the reviews on there?