Scam.com is another of the complaint websites that has built authority by enabling anyone to say whatever they want online. Just the idea of being on this site should scare the heck out of any company. What’s worse than being called a scam? Sure, a company might have a problem with a customer who then lodges a “complaint.” But complaints can usually be remedied in some manner. In business, being called a scam is like a mortal wound.
We can remove scam.com posts, but as I have said before it doesn’t mean that we have to agree with how the site operates and the damage that it can cause.
I guess the main beef with sites like Scam.com is that they let anyone say anything they want but then don’t really do anything else. Back in the golden age of television news, shows like 60 Minutes and 20/20 (and to a lesser extent local consumer reporters) would uncover actual scams and then actually do something about it. The great Mike Wallace would chase down executives who scammed people and make them answer for their ill-gotten gains. Even consumer groups provided some relief for folks who were legitimately scammed. Sadly, sites like Scam.com seem to mainly promote an open forum that does as much harm as good to companies, institutions and brands.
I took a look at the site’s terms of use and found that, like other complaint sites, it doesn’t endorse the accuracy or reliability of the information. Typical points are made:
- Scam.com does not represent or endorse the accuracy or reliability of any advice, opinion, statement or other information provided by any information provider…
- Reliance upon any such advice, opinion, statement, or other information shall also be at the User’s own risk.
And here’s one of my favorites:
- Just because a business, person, or entity is listed on scam.com does not necessarily constitute they are scammers.
The organizers of the site also make the interesting choice to cite the legal reasons why they don’t have to give a crap about what is posted on their sites. From Scam.com:
1.) Barrett v. Rosenthal:Websites assume no responsibility for comments or content provided by third parties as provided by ample case law including the recent California decision in Barrett v. Rosenthal.
2.) Federal Court Reaffirms Immunity of Bloggers and Forums from Suits Brought Against Commenters: Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act provides that “[no] provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider,” and that “[n]o cause of action may be brought and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law that is inconsistent with this section.” A recent decision of the First Circuit has reaffirmed the broad protection this statute provides to bloggers and message board administrators.
All well and good, but just because it’s legal, does it make it right? To me, it’s unpoliced people saying whatever they heck they want, mainly to the detriment of good people and upstanding businesses.
We have developed strategies to take on Scam.com and remove Scam.com postings. Contact us to discuss and we can give you options.
If you have had experiences with Scam.com, please share them on our How to Remove Scam.com Forum.
–John
Call me to discuss your online issue at 888-960-0086, ext. 701
