homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.211.219.178
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member

Visit PubCon.com
Home / Forums Index / Local / Foo
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: incrediBILL & lawman

Foo Forum

    
Google removes 'paedophile' claim on review website
18 months after the totally false claim was made !
Leosghost




msg:4383135
 6:13 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)

A business owner accused in a Google review of being a paedophile and a thief has said he is delighted that the search giant has removed the entry.


The message was placed on Google's Places review service 18 months ago.

Toni Bennett said he had planned legal action to force Google to delete the false posting after the firm said it did not qualify for removal.


possible to sabotage a business within five minutes, and that the problem was widespread.



[bbc.co.uk...]

 

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:4383251
 9:48 pm on Nov 3, 2011 (gmt 0)

This makes my blood boil! they should be made to pay massive compensation in cases like this.

I watched the TV documentary on Tuesday night about Trip Advisor. They are another company who accept unconfirmed reviews that can ruin people's businesses and their lives and they are happy to do so.

[channel4.com...]

Regulation is long overdue on this.

Old_Honky




msg:4383314
 1:37 am on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)

Online reviews serve no useful purpose. At best they are just somebody's subjective opinion. At worst they are spiteful rubbish or (in the case of product reviews) written by a moron who doesn't understand the product.

I never read reviews on anything, I look at the info or better still go and take a physical look, then make my own mind up. I'm not interested in the views of some swivel eyed loony with an axe to grind.

The program about trip advisor showed just what sort of people these self appointed critics are - overblown self important nonentities striving to prove that their dull little lives have some meaning by being over critical of what, to the unbiased observer, is obviously at least adequate service. Their comments were cruel and unnecessary.

wheel




msg:4383331
 2:13 am on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)

I read product reviews all the time, they're a great help.

Google's problem is a slipperly slope. It's a balance between letting people talk, and stopping people who shouldn't be talking. It's pretty subjective.

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:4383412
 8:41 am on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)

Online reviews serve no useful purpose.

I have to disagree with you there. Despite my objections to how they operate I use Trip Advisor all the time and I generally get a good result. When you are a regular user you are generally able to read between the lines of any ranking based on the type of reviews. False reviews (good and bad) can normally be spotted quite easily.

I booked a hotel in Thailand recently which had had a terrible review from someone. When I read it it was clear that the person dissing it had not actually stayed there. She was angry that when she tried to book a room they were full up. What is wrong with TA is that they do not moderate properly. I have on occasion pointed out that certain reviews are obviously false but they seldom do anything about this. Meanwhile businesses are being destroyed by these vindictive comments.

I see Trip Advisor and Google as the publishers of these comments so they should be held responsible for them. We need to get a system in place that makes it easier for people to hold them to account when they are being harmed by the comments they publish.

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:4383413
 8:42 am on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)

The program about trip advisor showed just what sort of people these self appointed critics are

I certainly agree with this. How sad are these people whose whole life revolves around dissing business on TA?

piatkow




msg:4383432
 9:53 am on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)


I certainly agree with this. How sad are these people whose whole life revolves around dissing business on TA?

Some people really do get off on complaining. In pre web days they just wrote letters to companies and got bland replies from the poor devil in head office tasked with pacifying the cranks and weirdos.

rmillc




msg:4383433
 9:55 am on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)

I read product reviews all the time, they're a great help.

Google's problem is a slipperly slope. It's a balance between letting people talk, and stopping people who shouldn't be talking. It's pretty subjective.

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:4383437
 10:14 am on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)

Yes it is but if someone used Google to accuse a person of being a paedophile with no evidence being presented and this person objects then Google is duty bound to do something about it. Refusing to do anything while knowing that the facts favour the offended person is just as criminal as the false accusation.

It is a disgrace that this is allowed. All review websites should insist on proven identification before accepting reviews and those who post them should then be held accountable.

piatkow




msg:4383486
 1:17 pm on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)


All review websites should insist on proven identification before accepting reviews and those who post them should then be held accountable.

I have no problems about using a pseudonym but the publishing site should have the real id on record.

BeeDeeDubbleU




msg:4383498
 1:43 pm on Nov 4, 2011 (gmt 0)

^ I agree. ^

I would not be asking anyone to reveal their identity publicly but people who make reviews should be accountable and to be accountable the review websites should insist on personal and contact details.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Local / Foo
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved