Having used the Service Central website a number of times in the past, and finding the responses to jobs I post to be quite fast and easy to respond to, I started looking closely at the business model of Service Central, and where their loyalties lie.
One would presume that if an advertiser paid to list on a website, they would have some control over how their business was portrayed. In fact, the credibility of any business is critical but none more so than a small, hard-working sole trader whose primary source of work comes from websites they pay good money to advertise on.
So it comes as a surprise to find that Melbourne based company Service Central are allowing ‘customers’, real or imagined, to leave negative feedback on an advertiser’s business profile page. What is particularly alarming is that Service Central see no reason to moderate the comments for veracity or to determine if a comment is defamatory, abusive, unsubstantiated or just down-right malicious.
As part of the signup process for advertisers, they agree to certain terms and conditions. Those terms state, quoted verbatim:
10.4 Service Central does not monitor or censor the opinions posted by Users on the Site nor investigate any remarks for accuracy or veracity. Service Central does not accept any liability for the accuracy or content of any material posted by other Users or Subscribers on the Site.
10.5 Provider releases Service Central from any claim, demands, proceedings, losses and damages (actual, special and consequential of every kind and nature including all legal fees) that may arise as a result of any use of the feedback system on the Site. Without limiting the foregoing, the Provider releases Service Central from any claims for defamation arising out of any comments or other materials posted at the Site.
These clauses in their terms cause some concern for two main reasons. Primarily, the fact that anyone who has requested a quote from a Provider can write pretty much whatever they want, without fear of having the post deleted, and Secondly, that Service Central believes that it can indemnify itself against comments made by a third party but posted on their website.
Legally, a publisher has an obligation to it’s advertisers and to the public at large to ensure that certain material does not appear on their website. Such material includes anything defamatory… something which is a) untrue or b) unsubstantiated, and c) injurious to the reputation of a business or an individual. A publisher cannot indemnify themselves from such actions because everyone has a right to defend themselves in a court against defamation. Thus, it is a right that cannot be taken away from someone.
Legalese aside, it is just bad business to allow unmoderated comments to be posted on a website that is reliant upon the support of their paying advertisers… that is, the Providers. The customers don’t pay Service Central, the Providers do. You could argue that it is for the protection of the customers who use the site, but one could equally argue that Service Central already has a dispute resolution system in place, where issues can be dealt with in a private forum without resorting to public shouting matches. Service Central could also easily moderate comments to ensure that certain posts that are clearly unreasonable never see the light of day.
So what about the ethics and business practices?
Ethically, is it acceptable to allow feedback on such a site? Surely if Ebay allow it, then it must be okay, right? Even on Ebay, a corporate juggernaut that has proved in the past that it can do whatever it wants, the seller still has the right to dispute feedback, and may have that feedback removed if it is deemed unsubstantiated, abusive, malicious, or defamatory.
So why would Service Central continue to allow unsubstantiated or defamatory comments to appear on their website? Why bite the hand that feeds you? I believe it comes down to market position. Unfortunately, when a company has market share they don’t need to kowtow as much to their advertisers. They can get away with a little more every time. This mentality has been seen recently in the actions of Ebay, Paypal and Facebook.
At the end of the day, I do not believe that an advertiser who pays for listings or results should be subjected to the type of policies that Service Central employ. It is damaging to the reputation of businesses, it serves no real purpose (dispute resolution would be far more effective in solving issues) and it is damaging to Service Central’s bottom line. If Service Central felt so strongly about the protection of the public at large, then perhaps they should charge their customers a fee, instead of the providers. Bottom line, if you go in to bat for your customers, you can’t charge your advertisers for the privilege.
This post reflects the opinion of the author and in no way represents the opinions of any other company or person other than the author. The author has relied on facts at his disposal and cannot be held responsible for any inaccuracies in the veracity of the information provided herein.