As with blogging in general, it is important to phrase things the right way. People who feel their holiday has been spoiled may write as a reaction rather than writing a considered and factual piece and it wouldn’t surprise me if they stepped over the line.

Having said that, I suspect in most cases the firms would want the post removed and, if it was removed, would leave it at that. In those circumstances the willingness of the site owner to remove comments may be pivotal in whether the individual gets contacted, or worse.

Report this comment

With the recent experiences myself and others in the industry have had, I think this could be a good thing. In the cases of ‘false’, or malicious reviews, people should be made aware of the potential for litigation against them, should their false review lead to a proven negative effect on their chosen recipient’s business.

The bottom line (are you listening TripAdvisor?), is that ‘reviewers’ should not be given the opportunity to sour the reputation of, and undo the years of hard work that goes into building up a business. Not without remaining accountable, and not hiding behind a ‘nom de plume’.

I’m all for costructive and fair criticism. I’m not for having any Tom, Dick or Harry given the potential ‘power’ to wreak havoc via. a keyboard and a willing travel website.

Report this comment

I think a bit of knee-jerk is at play here.

The internet sometimes takes the liberty of free speech to the extreme. People think the intenet is not ‘the real world’ but just a jumble of pixels, a fantasy playground where you can shout your mouth off about anything behind a smokescreen and not get your fingers burned.

Reality lives in a different universe. In much the same way as you wouldn’t stand outside a travel agent with a big placard saying their service stinks, without backing up your argument with sound and lucid reasoning, there’s absolutely no reason why you should be able to get away with this on the more anonymous-feeling electronic platform.

I read a lot of travel reviews and sense malice at play. Equally different cultures have a different interrpretation of how service should and should not be delivered. This is best exemplified by what Europeans and Americans exemplify as ‘acceptable’ from a hotel. We Brits, for example, have a tendency to accept nuances and quirks as ‘charming peculiarities’ of a holiday experience. Americans can often be more scathing and, perhaps, realistic!

So it was only a matter of time before operators got tough on the playing field. Who knows whether what is threatened will in fact be executed and defined as internet case law.

I can certainly side with the hospitality industry in wanting to decry those who intentionally (or perhaps) unintentionally set out to destabilise the business of individuals by posting reviews that lack evidential substance.

One thing’s for sure: interesting times are ahead.

Report this comment

@ Dave. I’m pleased that you can see the side of those of us unfortunate enough to have fallen victim to that section of internet user who thinks it’s great that they’re offered a platform to spout lies at worst, and mistruths at best. The responsibility lies with those that provide the platform, as well as those using it.

@Darren. God forbid that I’d want to sue anyone who lodged a genuine and valid complaint about their stay with us. I’d be the first one trying to help make amends. But, what we have to put up with on THIS side of the fence quite often goes way, way beyond the pale. And, as a consequence, we can suffer greatly simply because of the way some travel sites are structured to give voice to those who want to (for want of a better phrase) cause trouble.

You know, to still be able to publish a ‘review’ up to 5 years after you stayed there is utter nonsense. FIVE years! First of all, you’re allowed to publish almost anything you like, without evidence to back up your claim. Secondly, you can do that anonymously. To cap it all, five years later you can publish it. The place could have changed hands, could be completely different in every way imaginable to the present set of circumstances. When the owner/manager wishes to respond to those claims, it’s a real battle, as time after time the response is deemed to be ‘outside the website’s guidelines’! I personally gave up after three attempts at a ‘Management Response’.

There needs to be a structured, responsible way, right across the board for ‘reviews’ to be published if the industry is to benefit from the procedure at all. I don’t know what that is. Yet. But I sure as hell know what it isn’t!

Report this comment

But are the reviews being published for the benefit of the industry? I mean, is that even the intention behind them? I thought they were there to help travellers — not hoteliers — they get enough help already.

While I can understand why properties get upset about a negative review, proprietors aren’t running around demanding evidence to support positive reviews — should they be able to have it both ways?

A guest (or non-guest for what is worth, as I don’t believe you should have to have stayed at a hotel/guesthouse/whatever to be permitted to review it) posts a review saying XYZ has the “best position on the beach”. But does it?

Should the reviewer need to survey all the other properties just to check none were better positioned? What about if the owner of ABC resort reckons they have the best position on the beach? Should they be able to sue?

Of course not. It is an opinion. I think your room has cockroaches in it. You don’t. Ok. Let’s move on — and lets be honest here — most rooms have cockroaches in them — you just have to look harder sometimes…

At the end of the day it is often just as difficult to “prove” a positive review as a negative one, but hoteliers don’t appear to be clamouring to get the former addressed.

As far as old reviews are concerned, why not? What about a review that was posted five years ago? Should that be allowed to stay, or should it be removed because of some of the situations mentioned above? If it should be allowed to stay, then I see no problem in punters posting on a stay of five years ago — as long as the review mentions that “these events took place five years ago”.

Yes I agree, if a review is patently false (for example says the property is run by an axe-murderer, but it isn’t) then the review should be removed, but otherwise, as long as there is a means for the property to chime in to correct the felony from axe-murdering to a parking ticket, I really don’t see what all the drama is about.

Report this comment

All it takes is for one high profile court case to happen where a customer gets sued – it will swarm all over the internet and people will be afraid to leave reviews – that would be worrying for Tripadvisor!

Report this comment

I think Stuart hit the nail on the head when he said “It is only an opinion”. The point he makes about the best position on the beach is a prime example. You could three different people about a stretch of beach and come up with three different answers.

Thats what makes humans different we all see things in a different way and therefore have opposite opionions about the smae thing. How many times have said they visited a restaurant and had something that they thought was wonderful and you have gone along and thought it mediocre.

I agree some people shall use the platform to to try and rubbish hotels etc but if the hotels are one hundred percent sure it is wrong then there is nothing stopping them going into the review site and posting a counter comment. I think the review sites serve to purposes, it informs travellers of what to expect and if the traveller industry management use it correctly it can provide them with an early warning of possible troube brewing with their properties.

Read Trip Advisor and you shall rveiews about the same hotel etc and they shall cover almost the full spectrum from rubbish to best holiday I have had. That is what free speech is about, having your own opinion of something. It should be remembered (the 5years ago scenario is one) that a bad review covers a period of time, once time has gone the review becomes invalid because all the faults could have been corrected.

Report this comment

I speak as a journalist with media law training here, and I rather wish hotels would sue people who leave clearly defamatory reviews.

Naturally hotels would be mad to pursue anyone who leaves a negative review (it’d be dreadful publicity, and most could probably be backed up with a ‘fair comment’ defence). But with freedom comes responsibility: if you publish anything – and that includes a blog post or comment, it is your responsibility to ensure that it is fair and accurate.

I agree the libel laws are outdated (the burden of proof should be on the person bringing up the case rather than the defendant), but they are there for a very good reason. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but if you’re going to broadcast that opinion, you should be prepared to live with the consequences. If you’re not sure on the legality of what you’re saying, don’t mouth off in public forums such as the internet.

More interestingly, I’m not sure how legally valid those indemnity clauses are. In British libel law, both publisher and writer can be sued for defamatory statements. If it goes up on TripAdvisor – a publisher – TripAdvisor can be sued if it’s libellous.

Bloggers and social media types are all too quick to criticise the old-fashioned ways of the mainstream media, but some forget about their accountability for what they publish. The right to publish freely on the web comes with the responsibility for what is published – and this is sadly neglected at times.

Report this comment

I have long had a somewhat uneasy feeling about online review(s) (sites), and that unease is only growing. At first, they seem a great thing – certainly for those who work bloody hard to please our guests: loads of great reviews means loads more guests. And then something nasty happens.

The problem as I see it the general idea behind these online reviews comes out of a consumer versus producer scenario in which there is very definitely a ‘one-size-fits-all’ attitude.

The consumer has to watch out because the nasty big corporate boys and girls are out to screw you for everything they can. So the consumer fights back, and everyone from Anne Robinson to TripAdvisor are there ready to ensure no one gets ripped off.

The problem, as I see it, is that the consumer think the pendulum has swung in the opposite direction and they think they are out to screw the big boys and girls and get everything they can.

As Stu Bradley says a lot of independent holiday home owners, like myself, work bloody hard to offer a holiday with a difference – and there are enough websites out there extolling the virtues of holidaying in a privately owned cottage to a clinical, characterless hotel (of which there is often one identical in ever major city around the world). But we often get treated the same, tarred with the same brush, and are expected to slash prices to ridiculous rates just to get some saggy bum in a bed.

And when Carry Consumer does not get what she wants – all she needs to do is log on to the internet and take out her frustrations using her keyboard. Small, privately owned ventures like my own, and those that Stu is referring to, stand to loose a great deal more than some of the larger hotels (who could probably afford legal costs to chase up fallacious reviews).

I have once or twice, rarely admittedly – but enough to cause concern, had to face troublesome guests where something really needed to be said to them.

I was not worried about any reaction there and then (in the case of personal security and highly intoxicated anti-social men), but I was worried about getting a negative review if I asked them to temper their behaviour.

Review sites should be much more cognisant of the various types of holiday accommodation they cater for on their sites and ensure they are all protected from malicious trouble makers.

Report this comment

Britain’s libel laws are notoriously draconian and chilling to free speech. This should change.

In the mean time the main defence to libel that would apply to reviewers is ‘fair comment’. This means that the reviewer is entitled to express his or her opinion – but the opinion must be based on facts. Say I am reviewing a hotel with blue paintwork and I think it’s ugly. I could say “the hotel is ugly – the toilet blue colour of the walls made me feel like I was in a bad David Lynch film”. I could not say “the hotel is ugly – the brown and orange striped paintwork gave off a 70s vibe.” Similarly I could say “the customer service was patchy and I found it hard to find staff when I needed them”. I could not say “the hotel was short-staffed” because I’m not in a position to verify that.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice but I’ve had legal training as a journalist.

Report this comment

I wonder if this will also apply to professional reviewers, ie the people who write columns in newspapers recounting and grading the hotels they stay in? Or is it just for the general public?

Report this comment

It already applies to professional reviewers – that’s the point. ANYONE publishing a review anywhere is responsible for ensuring that the review is within the law.

Report this comment

Like Thomas, I’m the owner (along with the wife) of a small, independent operation. We’re trying to grow the business, and provide value for money holidays for anyone who wants them. We’re not a faceless entity, a major international hotel/restaurant chain. We’re a family owned and run business. We work hard. It’s very, very rewarding. But, as Thomas says, sometimes we may be faced with having to make a call on someones behaviour or something ,(very, very seldom, but it can happen) and we’re not afraid of the ‘there & then’, but what may transpire afterwards. For some people, while they may be all sweetness & light whilst staying with you, you may well inadvertently have pressed a button that could come back to haunt you sometime later. In the case of TA, maybe up to five years later. But that’s another story.

To say that hoteliers already get a fair crack of the whip may well be true. I don’t know, I’m not a hotelier, I’m just someone who, like Thomas, pours heart & soul into what he does for a living in the hope that some of you who visit us, like what we do, and come back. Fortunately for us, that’s very often what happens.

So, while I do think that negative reviews have a place, I think that equally, they should be backed up with photographic evidence if the reviewer genuinely thinks the place was that bad.

Here’s a question for you – I wonder how many guests would be up for being ‘reviewed’ by hoteliers? I wonder how you’d all feel about ‘reviews’ then?

Report this comment

It seems a vague law that will be difficult to enforce – especially considering the different legal jurisdictions that could be potentially involved. I’d rather hotels address negative comments the way that most other people do online. Either by ignoring it or engaging in conversation.

Report this comment

As per Anil, I think engagement and/or ignoring on a case by case basis is a fair approach.

Negative reviews do have their place and readers should be able to distinguish between a credible negative comment and a rant. But sometimes ignoring works better — we were looking at a weekender the other day and one of the comments was a quite heavy handed rant, they’d obviously not enjoyed their stay, but within the foam and spit (a lot of which was probably hyperbole), there were was a couple of seemingly pretty valid issues (for instance, different villas could see into each other’s bathtubs and showers). That made us a bit iffy about the place, then when the owner posted a “management response” they indeed confirmed that there was a “screening issue” and that they were thinking about sorting it out soon. We’ll be staying elsewhere else…

But my point is, should just the ranting bits of the comment be removed?

Report this comment

There have been recent court rulings on this in Germany, which I have already tweeted about. There is much tighter legal control of the internet in Germany. Reviewers need to be careful of posting unfounded allegations. Hopefully, publicity like this will warn off the malicious reviewers.

Report this comment

@Darren. I suppose (I don’t want you to go into detail) that the company who sued you for libel were quite a large entity, with perhaps their own ‘on call’ lawyers to deal with such events? If so, then that illustrates my thoughts perfectly. When you do have a bit of corporate weight behind you, it’s easier to make these problems disappear. When you’re living by the skin of your teeth from season to season, it’s very difficult to turn around the potential damage caused by a malicious ‘review’. You cannot really ‘engage’ with what amounts to a pack of lies. If you do, it could appear that you’re giving credence to the ‘review’. If you don’t, people may think you’re just lying low, hoping the ‘review’ will go away. You’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t.

Negative reviews quite rightly, are much easier to deal with as they’re based in fact. You are then able to engage with the reviewer, and hopefully learn from the experience. We take criticism when it comes in the spirit in which it’s intended. Hopefully, we’re improved as a holiday destination by it. But only if we act on it. If the criticism is valid, say for instance (as in Stuart’s example) that you can see from one bathroom to the next, and we don’t do anything about it, then we fully deserve the negative review. What we’d be able to do in those circumstances though is to fix the problem, then engage with the reviewer to let everyone know (with pictorial evidence perhaps) that the problem had been fixed! As I say, that’s not possible with an entirely fictitious review from a visit that never happened. It does happen, believe me.

I do not agree that reviews should be allowed from people who’ve never stayed at a place. What would be the angle there? “I walked past this place and it looked nice from the outside, but I can’t comment on the staff/breakfasts/beds/rooms/decor/views/showers because I didn’t even stay there.” Pointless. Surely people want to know the details?

I also believe that reviews should have a limited ‘shelflife’. Maybe two or three years. That way, everyone should be on their toes to ensure the good reviews keep rolling in. From large hotel chains down to the smallest country B&B would need to be on top of their game, if they wanted fresh comments and reviews that worked for them.

Interesting as always.

Report this comment

What ever happened to free speech?

If this becomes the case, no one will leave reviews and the whole infrastructure of review-based websites will crumble. I agree that people should be able to back up their claims if it comes to it. Same goes for overtly positive reviews — which I always suspect are ghost writers from the establishments themselves.

If it expands from this, then Amazon will really be in the doghouse as there’s an incredible amount of libellous reviews on there! Instead of the hotels turning on its customer base, perhaps as customers we should go back to basis and create a platform whereby hotels plus and minuses are revealed with tangible evidence. And I stress, this is meant to communicate both the good, and not so good aspects of the industry.

Report this comment

@stu On reviews from people who haven’t stayed – Haven’t you ever been on holiday, taken a look at another property and thought “that’s where I’ll stay next time”, likewise have you never walked into a place, planning to stay there, only to find reception so rude you turned around and walked back out again. I’d say both of those are reasonable candidates for a review — as long as the review notes you didn’t stay there.

On old reviews – a history of reviews can clearly illustrate how a property has improved (or slid downhill) over time — this (I think) is especially valuable with repeat custom, punters who stay at the same place every year — “carpet a bit ratty and a lot of the pool tiles were chipped” carries more weight when it is from a guest who has posted very positive reviews on the same property previously.

Report this comment

@Ant. Nothing’s happened to free speech. Free speech is where you’re allowed to say what you want, where you want, when you want.

But, free speech also means that unless you’re speaking the truth, and have evidence to support you, then be prepared for someone to take a stance against you. Possibly legally. Again, Amazon and the like have nothing to fear as an entity if it clearly states in their user T&C’s that the ‘reviews’ are the work of the reviewer alone.

This is one of the problems that needs addressing, namely the ‘distance’ that websites put between themselves and their content. What this engenders is an atmosphere whereby you can indeed publish potentially libellous stuff (as Darren himself found out) without attracting any legal attention, as the ‘onus’ is on the individual, rather than the company.

The only drawback I can see as far as Amazon are concerned would be a possible downturn in reviews as people thought twice about the possible implications of their ‘reviews’. And that just has to be good for all concerned. because then, we’re getting the truth about a product.

@Stuart. I still don’t agree about submitting a review about anything unless you’ve tried it and tested it. If I’d been in that scenario, I’d then search for any reviews on the place.

I couldn’t, and wouldn’t (if I were the kind of person that couldn’t leave my PC chair without having reviews to guide me…) take a punt on a place that had only a review from someone who’d never stayed there, but had seen it from the outside, in passing.

But, I do think you have valid points re. the longevity of reviews. I can see how the timeline aspect could help the traveller reach a decision. Ok – what about having a ‘window’ of opportunity for submitting a review.

Say, up to 6-months after visiting a property? Rather than being allowed up to five years to suddenly remember that place you visited back in 2004, and post a review on TA about it as it was then. There being a very strong chance that the place now bears absolutely no resemblance to what it was in 2004.

@Margaret. I’m pleased that Germany’s taking a stance on this. I’d like to find out just what the French legal take on this is.

Still interesting. But no-one’s answered my question yet.

Report this comment

Hi folks. Just came here after searching online for something about travel.

I happen to be interested on the legal aspects also, including this. And I agree with some of the comments here, especially where freedom comes with responsibility.

And as someone else mentioned, different jurisdictions have different approaches and stances on this otherwise ornery issue. In the U.S., for example, web site publishers like TripAdvisor can be protected against this under the U.S. Communications Decency Act (section 230, I think).

Then you got Margaret Leach commenting how ‘Net control is essentially tighter in Germany. And now the OP’s own case.

I used to work for a website hosting provider in a previous life. Can’t even count my fingers and toes how many times we’ve been “asked” to give customer names, IP addresses, etc. after served with court orders, which indeed goes to show people can be tracked.

Just depends if one’s willing to make a determined effort.

Report this comment

[...] first heard about the possibility of getting sued for writing a negative review on the Travel Rants blog.  Blogger Darren Cronian referenced an article from an Australian news site that warned reviewers [...]

Report this comment

I think you can post a review which gives a fair impression of the hotel without it being libelous – there are ways to hint and cockroaches and worse without actually having to get out the video camera. Anyway, a quick snap of the grimy shower can replace a thousand words.

Of course I never stay in hotels that I’d want to write anything but a glowing review for, because I always check the reviews on Tripadvisor first! Even the best hotels have a few bad reviews, but I hope I can sort the wheat from the chaff

Report this comment

I have travelled quite a bit of this world and expect reasonable service where I stay. I have only ever felt compelled to write a bad review of one hotel that was so bad that I felt it reasonable to warn others of my bad experience.
I have since seen other, different reviews on the same place, but what would apparently be unacceptable to me has been ok for others. It is just an opinion and can be balanced by others point of view.
People do not normally go out of their way to rubbish a hotel, unless they feel they have reason to do so, they simply have better things to do. If it helps to have hotels etc deliver good or better service, then it has a value, unfortunately people don’t place the same prioity to compliment good service when they receive it!

Report this comment

I’m all for writing a review on a hotel whether it be good or bad. However, you do have to take them with a grain of salt. As it is known “perception IS reality”, no matter what the circumstances are surrounding the issue. With that being said as a hotelier I also know that there are indeed valid complaints/issues and then there are people who are upset that the compensation they received was not to their satisfaction.

In the olden days it used to be that nearly any complaint about your stay would warrant you compensation of some sort, in most cases a free night. However, in light of the downed economy hotels also have to maintain integrity so if you complain, now I’ll do my research before I jump on the compensation bandwagon (depending on the situation). Most times, there is no back-up to the complaint or the complaint is simply a guest who just plain doesn’t “like” the fee or something else with the room, those are not compensation warrented – those are “opinions”, of which I am not responsible for.

Don’t get me wrong, I work in a well-known 4 diamond property and service is an absolute must, but again, there is also the integrity of the hotel to protect as well. So…if I didn’t happen to give you a free room because your eggs were cold and you threaten to write to corporate or to blasphemize us on TripAdvisor – it’s your choice. But, so long as consumers remember “perception IS reality” and take each review with a grain of salt, then by all means people – keep blogging.

Report this comment

Another blow for free speech! Mind you, the number of reviews you see where it’s blatantly obvious that one hotel’s employees/owners are slagging off the competition, are ever increasing. Perhaps if customer service was higher up on the agenda rather than legal action, stays would be more pleasant for all of us.
Cheers.

Report this comment

I published a comment on TripAdvisor because I found an exposed needle on the floor of a motel. The staff didn’t care, so I naturally shared it with the world, without distorting the facts, but adding my opinion to it. Now the motel is suing me instead of asking me to remove my comment. What a shame. They really only care about the money they’ll make with this lawsuit. And I thought they cared about their reputation and customers!

Report this comment