Slashdot Mirror
California Tells Businesses: Stop Trying To Ban Consumer Reviews
ericgoldman writes Some businesses are so paranoid about negative consumer reviews that they have contractually banned their customers from writing reviews or imposed fines on consumers who bash them. California has told businesses to stop it. AB 2365--signed by Governor Brown yesterday, and the first law of its kind in the nation--says any contract provisions restricting consumer reviews are void, and simply including an anti-review clause in the contract can trigger penalties of $2,500.
There is one sure way to reduce negative reviews: Make sure your product and/or service is good quality.
Nothing can entirely eliminate negative reviews, because sometimes people just get a lemon product, or the person giving them service was having a bad day, or they're just ornery people who can't be satisfied. But if you do your job right, monitor your employees to make sure they're not slacking off or mistreating your customers—and, of course, the best way to do this is to make sure they're satisfied with their jobs in the first place—and don't skimp monetarily on the quality of your product, service, or employees, then you're likely to get more good reviews than bad.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
I don't care how many 1-star reviews a place get. You know what matters? How they respond to them.
I'd rather go to a place that replies politely to every negative review than one that ignores them entirely. And if they are genuinely fake, things such as "We have no record of your stay, but we're sorry that you had trouble" speak a thousand times more to what's actually happening then any amount of ignorance.
Everywhere gets bad reviews. You cannot have perfection. What matters is how you deal with when you fuck up.
Reviews are like a box of chocolate.
The person with the loose filling always gets the caramel instead of the strawberry truffle they were expecting.
You stop putting the start of your comment in the subject and the rest in the body. Why? BECAUSE IT IS HARD TO READ - like all caps (BUT WORSE). We can quickly gloss over the effect it has on your argument, whether good or bad.
Here is an example from my home state, Utah:
http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/n...
This crap is actually happening a lot! Its one of the rare instances where I hope the nation follows Cali.
Which has more power: the hammer, or the anvil?
We need more penalties just for trying to include illegal terms in a non-negotiable contract. It's not enough to simply say "well, the courts will toss it out if they try to enforce it" - because that relies on people being able to fight a legal battle that they shouldn't have needed to fight to begin with.
This law applies specifically to consumer goods. How many consumer goods require an NDA to purchase? In pretty sure not even the Apple store has tried that.
We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
We don't
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
What you're saying is, every small business has to do business with Yelp. They're the 1000 lb gorilla in this case, and Yelp itself has earned plenty of bad reviews from businesses forced to deal with them.
It doesn't hurt to be nice.
I own a tiny one person business. In order for me to reply to comments on Yelp! I have to pay them a monthly fee. Last time I looked one patient gave me a glowing review. Before that I was "invisible." After that I got 30 calls from people working for Yelp! trying to get to to 'join.'
Meanwhile, other business review websites have popped up, giving me 4/5 stars. Basically, they quote the Yelp! review, but knock it down one star. For low number of reviews? For?
For me fortunately it probably makes no difference. But at the same time if I'm looking for a plumber it is so easy to go with the guy with good reviews.
If a company sold me a moldy product, I don't see why I would care if they refuse to sell to me again. It's not like the situation would likely come up.
A shill posting a fake review is still committing defamation. A company whose purpose is to commit crimes is committing racketeering. This law covers fines for bad reviews from customers not negative reviews from non customers.
My dad pretty much does this. He says sometimes there are customers not worth having. They bitch and moan, saying everything is wrong even though the product is 100% fine. He would not have been in business 40 years if it wasn't, with almost all of his customers being repeat clients. These people just trying to get a massive discount on a product . So my dad just tells them to go to his competitor because he no longer wants their business.
It's like the people in a restaurant who eat 80% of their food then say they don't like it and ask for refund.
I worked at a small independent grocery store where sometimes we had loss leaders. Well there was this one lady who owned a local restaurant and would come in and load up her cart full of the sale item. We told her she couldn't do that and was meant for families. So we started putting limit signs. She would then start sending in her kids to get more. After so much hassle and constantly running out of product annoying others customers, the owner banned her and her family from the store
This law applies specifically to consumer goods. How many consumer goods require an NDA to purchase?
Many EULAs contain something that is NDA-like.
Some consumer products even forbid you from publishing performance metrics or the results of comparative performance testing.... if I recall correctly, VMware used to be known for this, specifically.
That's one more headache for small businesses. Oh great, I forgot to check supplies because I was on Yelp. Now we're out of Dijon mustard. Next thing you know, there's a 1-star review from somebody who loves Dijon mustard. If there isn't any existing law, conspiracy to place unwarranted negative reviews should also be illegal. Competitors and their employees should be barred, or at the very least required to disclose their positions. That would be similar to the financial talking heads on TV who have to say if they own the stocks they discuss.
If the business ran out of Dijon mustard, they deserve the one star review from the Dijon lover -- that way other Dijon lovers can steer clear. Why shouldn't a restaurant get bad reviews for not stocking an expected condiment? If the restaurant doesn't have time to stock basic supplies, what else is falling through the cracks?
It should be a clear enough distinction. Hotel's and restaurants don't get you to sign NDA's.
Some may start adding a non-disclosure clause, that is, if they think it can allow them to legally restrict negative reviews.
I'm not so sure what that widely repeated line from the film Forrest Gump is supposed to mean. Every box of Zachary chocolates that I've seen has a map of the chocolates on the inside of the lid. I wonder if this misconception was meant as a sign of Forrest's inability to read the map due to mild low intelligence. Or are maps of chocolate samplers the result of increased food allergen awareness that didn't exist during the era when the film takes place? Or am I overanalyzing?
NDAs are to cover technology or "trade secrets" - writing a review for "peppermint Coca-Cola" (making something up) saying "it sucks moose balls" isn't revealing their 'recipe' for making it or anything secret, anyone can buy a can and make their own judgement.
By the same token, even if I enter an NDA with a company to, say, integrate their technology into a product - saying "these people are a PITA to work with and I would never want to deal with them again" isn't violating the NDA on their technology.
Now... I could see perhaps if you entered into a deal with say Rossi and the "eCat" cold fusion nonsense, that saying "they're a fraud, the technology is a hoax" might perhaps be a gray area - but still, as long as you're not revealing their 'secret catalyst' or the actual (non-) functioning details of the device, you aren't really revealing their 'secret' technology?
Well it wasn't me, I was just a kid working there. And what are you talking about? We sold to everyone at that price. We had a LIMIT sign on it and she STILL had a cart load of product. Remember this wasn't walmart with 50 skids of product in the back, we were a small independent grocer. We let her take it a few times, but enough is enough. When she literally takes 1/'2 the product not leaving much for anybody else that's bullshit.
Let me guess you are one of those asshats who is selfish and takes everything for yourself and screw everyone else.
You're right that businesses should respond to negative reviews and customer complaints. However, the burden is rather high on small businesses to be constantly doing this. And hiring an outside firm to do it doesn't guarantee satisfactory results all the time either.
Since Google's being forced to delist web pages (DMCA and all), Yelp and other such directory sites probably should be forced to have a delist procedure as well. In fact, I would think that a lot of issues with fake reviews and fake updates and such would be solved if many of these things were opt-in (in the same way that Craig's List or eBay or Amazon Marketplace or Google Shopping is opt-in). At the very least, there should be an ability to opt-out.
I mean, it's one thing to complain when the system you took part in is working against you, but it's something else to be forced into the system that without your active involvement is being gamed against you.
People forget that consumer protection is not just about protecting the consumer directly, but also about preventing unfair business practices to maintain a competitive landscape (this falls in the same vein as price collusion, except it's one bad actor instead of multiple bad actors).
"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
no, those are nougat. As far as my family knows, the never come with caramal :)
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Their intent is to sell to local families, not be a restaurant supply business. The women intentional abused the intent. When the spelled it out to her, she still abused the intent. So they banned her. They chose to put families over a business, and good for them.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Agreed. I always go straight to the bad reviews. Usually the 2-3 star are the most useful. 1 star is often posted by people that will never be happy and is usually a rant about something insignificant, unless there are lots of them. Even a company with 99% ratings, I'll look at those 2-3 stars to see how they handle things when they DO have problems,
That's the real lesson companies need to learn. Bad reviews are a great chance for good PR. It's ok to screw up. Last time I logged a complaint at Amazon, I almost felt bad about having said anything. THAT is why they're dominating the market. I have paid extra to buy things through them rather than direct from a dealer because the Amazon backing had that much value to me. I didn't know if the dealer would back the product, but I *KNEW* Amazon would.
Does this mean that DeWitt clauses (http://sqlmag.com/sql-server/devils-dewitt-clause) prohibiting publication of benchmark results are now invalid by statute in California? I'm sure that would be he very definition of 'unintended consequence', but I'd love for it to be true.
I don't care how many 1-star reviews a place get. You know what matters? How they respond to them.
I'd rather go to a place that replies politely to every negative review than one that ignores them entirely. And if they are genuinely fake, things such as "We have no record of your stay, but we're sorry that you had trouble" speak a thousand times more to what's actually happening then any amount of ignorance.
Everywhere gets bad reviews. You cannot have perfection. What matters is how you deal with when you fuck up.
This x 1000.
Fuck ups happen, I'd rather stay with someone who understands how to deal with them than someone who pretends they dont happen.
I know quite a few hoteliers (protip: if you want a good room, book direct and not through an agency) and the problem isn't just bad reviews, the problem is that people are too meek (read: gutless) to bring a problem to a owner/managers attention. So the live with the problem for their entire stay and then make a "scathing" review on Yelp or trip advisor. So often a guest can do something about their problem with a short conversation with the owner or manager (or front desk if its a big hotel) but wont. Often the hotel management doesn't know about the problem (previous guests hide or ignore them because they're scared of being charged for it) and managers cant count on housekeepers working for minimum wage (or less in some countries) who have dozens of rooms to do, to do a thorough inspection when a guest leaves.
There is an art form to complaining and getting what you want. First you must be clear about the resolution you would like, but also friendly (this is why I prefer to do it in person rather than over the phone, even if I have to wait in a line). God and hotel managers help those who help themselves, going a little way to fixing an issue is enough to make someone else go a long way. Appreciation is always appreciated, just a thanks. To a hotelier it makes them feel good about themselves and you (this often leads to discounts, free upgrades and drinks, especially for repeat customers). For staff it earns them brownie points, promotions or sometimes bonuses (so if a front desk staffer, concierge or housekeeper helps you, leave a compliment and make sure to mention those who helped you by name).
Beyond this you have the outliers, guests who are just difficult to deal with. I'm sure we all know the kind, people who want to pay bottom dollar but expect champagne service and nothing is ever good enough for these people. Fortunately these people are as rare as they are arrogant and blusterous.
Of course there are always crap hotels. But a bigger issue is that a lot of people who have a bad time have a bad time because they did nothing to fix it. Why wait until after leaving to make your issue known and make a big song and dance on an anonymous message board when 99 times out of 100 they'll fix it for you because being hospitable is what the hospitality industry is all about.
Knowing a bit about how guests behave from the other side of the desk means I explicitly dont trust sites like Trip Advisor or Yelp because they're too easily manipulated by the passive aggressive. Also, they can be manipulated by the other side (especially Trip Advisor) to have genuine negative reviews quashed or edited (remember with these sites, you aren't paying for them so that makes you the product, not the client).
Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
You don't get to opt-out of being the subject of other people's freedom of speech.
Unless you're Kim Jong Un.
Freedom of speech. I can say anything I want about anyone.
Within reasonable limits. There are laws that cover libel, slander, nuisance, needlessly yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, etc.
I'm allowed to have an opinion.
Absolutely 100% true. But nobody is obliged to help you express that opinion. And IANAL, but my understanding is that your ability to express an opinion can be affected by any contract you sign, including the click-through contracts these companies are foisting on their customers at the time of purchase.
BTW, I wholeheartedly support what California is doing here. What these companies are doing is unconscionable, but possibly tenable. This law closes the door on it.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Did you fail comprehension? He clearly stated they sold the item at the advertised price. Loss leaders are perfectly legal (at least here in California), but you have to actually have to have a reasonable amount of the product on hand. So if a single person buys out all the stock, the business could get in trouble for not having the product on hand, which could be seen as bait-and-switch. When there is an extremely limited supply, it must be clearly stated in the advertisement. A loss leader is meant to attract customers in the hopes that they will buy additional items and make up for the loss and possibly gain a new regular customer. Also, it is perfectly legal to set a limit on sale items.
-- Will program for bandwidth
This seems almost like an extortion racket, but done by "refined" gentlemen instead of the mob.
My favorite bad review response ever:
Review:
Incredibly rude disgusting fat slob insulted me and my family. Needed a table for five wife and kids in line midway to counter, I decide to sit down (just had hip replacement) and this idiot approaches and tells me to order or get out. This punk needs for someone to adjust his attitude.
Response from the owner:
This is the fat slob. I wanted to put some context around Mr Scaccia's review. First, no disputting it, I'm fat. I take issue with the rude and slob parts. I shower every day. I say please and thank you. But, fat, unfortunately I can't dispute that.
OK, let's talk about our interaction yesterday. I was in the dining room as I am almost every Saturday and Sunday when we start to get really busy. We had a medium sized line (probably about 15 people) and we were seating groups as they ordered so that everyone could get a table before they get their food. I call it Kindergarten rules. if someone is in front of you, they get to go first. I came around the corner and Mr S was at a table that had been put together for 8 people as was a man caring a baby carrier who was also looking for a table for a larger group. I asked Mr S if he had ordered yet and he said he hadn't and I told him that we would get him a table once his group had ordered.
I couldn't get anything more out of my mouth. Mr S said "well if we can't have a table then we will just leave." I did not approach Mr. S and tell him to order or get out, I said that we would get him a table once his group had ordered. After he proclaimed that if he didn't get a table right then that he would leave, I told him to have a nice day.
This really isn't a position I ever like to be put in. We don't have a line to the door every saturday and sunday because we are bad at what we do. The line is there because we take care of our customers and all their requests, just as we would have taken care of Mr. S. I was still going to try to save this relationship, but what Mr. S did next shocked me so much that I froze. He threw his menu on the table, moved toward me and belly bumped me out of his way and stormed off. (I'm not sure if he noticed the video camera that hopefully caught all of this directly next to the flat screen in the corner as he pushed me out of his way)
I then proceeded to help the group of 8 with the baby and the group of 7 with the elderly couple who had waited in line and ordered, get their tables after they had ordered, as I did for the next hour and a half every other large group who walked in and calmly waited in our long but quickly moving line. I wish I had a much bigger restaurant and a much smaller stomach but the facts are the facts.
Mr S would have hopefully spent this morning back in Louisiana writing a great review about this little mom and pop restaurant in Houston if he had only let us do our job, but he chose to give me an ultimatum where I can't win. Let him take a table before two groups who were in front of him, making a family with small children and a baby stand and wait or the group with the elderly couple stand and wait. I feel I did the only thing I could and wish Mr. S the opportunity to reflect on this situation and see the big picture.
Brock Silverstein Pecan Creek Grille