The "red" and "black" of bad internet reviews
Read the tips
Recently, the Guangzhou police uncovered a gang case of "professional bad reviewers", revealing the inside story of "professional bad reviewers" blackmailing online shopping operators and disrupting the online shopping economy.
However, there are also cases where consumers have been retaliated or sued by businesses for giving "bad reviews."
In this regard, experts said that professional bad reviewers should not be allowed to act recklessly, but the "right to bad reviews" of consumers must be fully protected.
If the consumer’s “bad reviews” do not have bad motives and purposes such as fictitious facts, slander, slander, etc., it does not constitute an infringement of the operator’s reputation.
Recently, a case uncovered by the Guangdong police showed that “professional bad reviewers” not only made malicious claims from merchants, but also organized crimes by forming “learning groups for anti-counterfeiting and refunding compensation”, teaching extortion methods and “words” to merchants.
The reporter's interview found that in reality, some criminals saw the "business opportunities" in online reviews, and regarded "writing bad reviews" or "making screen review" as "professionals" and deliberately poured dirty water on businesses. Get the benefits.
This not only harms the legitimate rights and interests of businesses and affects the public’s entrepreneurship and employment, but also misleads consumers and undermines the online consumption environment.
However, there have been media reports earlier that a woman in Shanghai received a bad review for ordering takeout, and was retaliated by a takeaway, smashed at the door, insulted and threatened, and also extorted 200 yuan for "compensation."
After the person called the police, the deliveryman was detained for 10 days for provoking troubles, and the woman was forced to move because of fear of retaliation.
In this regard, experts pointed out that online evaluation is indispensable, and it is of great significance for promoting the honest operation of businesses and building brands.
As far as society is concerned, professional bad reviewers cannot be allowed to act recklessly, but the "right to bad reviews" of consumers must be fully protected.
Send bad reviews for extortion or even clearly mark the price to "accept live"
Some media recently reported that Wang Xiaojun, from Hefei, Anhui, has run a cake shop for many years and has a good reputation. However, on an e-commerce platform, he was complained that "there is a bug in the cake".
According to the police handling the case, under the name of "public welfare crackdown", this group organized minors and all kinds of idle personnel to create "online touch porcelain", threatened online store merchants with malicious comments, watering and other pressures, and demanded "protection". Fees” have a bad influence on the e-commerce platform.
The reporter learned from interviews that a very small number of "professional bad reviewers" often stare at newly opened stores, post multiple negative reviews first, and then blackmail them. At the same time, they continue to increase the price of "deleting negative reviews", putting pressure on the store.
Facing the extortion of "professional bad reviewers", some shops were forced to temporarily close, and some shops spent money to "eliminate disasters."
The "professional bad reviewers" team not only operate secretly, some even "accept jobs" with clear prices, and are even used by some shops as a tool to combat competitors. Some 6 yuan can buy a bad review.
Mo Yuanming, a professor at Chongqing Technology and Business University, said in an interview with reporters that it is difficult for the platform to accurately identify malicious bad reviews, which gives "professional bad reviewers" an opportunity.
Some shops reported malicious negative reviews to the platform, but the customer service staff of the platform stated that they could only delete some of the content that was identified as malicious reviews. Other negative reviews were difficult to deal with due to insufficient evidence, and merchants continued to receive malicious negative reviews; There are a large number of shops with negative reviews, but the direct losses of a single shop are less, which brings difficulties to the public security organs for filing and investigation, and it is not easy for shop owners to protect their rights.
Negative reviews without bad motives and purposes do not constitute infringement
Some people regard writing bad reviews as a profit-making method, but some have been retaliated against for giving bad reviews.
In recent years, consumers have been harassed by merchants and delivery staff, and even wounding incidents have occurred frequently after the point of difference.
In this regard, experts said that the "right to bad reviews" of consumers should also be fully protected.
Not long ago, the People's Court of Jiangbei District of Chongqing tried a case of negative online reviews against operators, and the court finally ruled that consumers did not constitute reputational infringement.
On March 30, 2020, Tao, Hao and others ate at a self-service barbecue restaurant opened by a catering service department in Jiangbei District, Chongqing. Hao developed acute vomiting and diarrhea the day after the meal, and was diagnosed with acute gastroenteritis. So he posted a comment in the comment area of a certain online store that suspected that the dishes were not fresh and caused vomiting and diarrhea, and filed a complaint with the market supervision department.
Since then, Hao and Tao posted negative reviews.
The catering service department believed that Tao and Hao had infringed on the reputation of their store, so they filed a lawsuit to the court, demanding an order for the two to delete improper comments posted on a certain website and an apology, as well as compensation for business losses and lawyer service fees. 25,000 yuan.
The People’s Court of Jiangbei District of Chongqing found that Hao did develop acute vomiting and diarrhea symptoms the day after the meal and sought medical treatment. He also filed a complaint with the market supervision department. It can be seen that his comments are based on facts and are also consistent with lack of medical expertise. There is no deliberately fabricated or fabricated facts in the common public perception.
Therefore, the litigation request of a certain food service department in Jiangbei District was rejected.
After the verdict, neither party appealed.
The judge of the People’s Court of Chongqing Jiangbei District believes that consumers’ negative comments on the operator’s subjective and true feelings on the online platform will not constitute an infringement of the operator’s reputation if there are no bad motives and purposes such as fictitious facts, defamation, and defamation. .
The platform applies technical means to protect legal rights
Mo Yuanming believes that when faced with the blackmail of "professional bad reviewers", businesses should have the courage to fight against them. To a certain extent, they will also alleviate their own rights protection dilemma and curb the phenomenon of malicious bad reviews.
He said that as technologies such as big data and artificial intelligence gradually mature, relevant platforms should gradually improve the accuracy of identifying negative reviews.
Even though "professional bad reviewers" will evade supervision by "buying accounts", "guerrilla warfare" and other methods, platforms can still take the initiative to identify "professional bad reviewers" from ordinary consumers based on the information provided by the merchants. Suppress malicious negative reviews at the source.
Mo Yuanming called on relevant departments to improve relevant laws and regulations on the governance of "professional bad reviewers", strengthen supervision measures, and unblock online reporting channels.
Public security organs and market supervision departments should intensify crackdowns on “professional bad reviewers” who are suspected of disrupting the normal business order of the company or slandering and spreading rumors.
Regarding the issue of protecting consumers’ “right to negative reviews”, relevant experts stated that when a business operator chooses to operate his shop on an online platform, he is deemed to agree to accept the consumer evaluation mechanism set up by the platform, and consumers have the right to use the evaluation mechanism to assess the shop’s The service or environment of the company shall be given a true evaluation, and the operator shall give necessary tolerance to this.
For the platform, institutional protection measures should be established to hide consumer information through technical means after the order is completed, and set up an "anonymous evaluation" option, where consumers themselves choose the method of public evaluation.
Li Guo