Glassdoor forced to reveal 'anonymous' author of critical Zuru review

Forums › Off topic › Glassdoor forced to reveal 'anonymous' author of critical Zuru review

tehgerbil

1102 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Subscriber

#298813 19-Jul-2022 08:24

Here's the full rundown on David Farrier's blog site:

https://www.webworm.co/p/glassdoor

Quite disturbing, but perhaps inevitable.

The interesting thing is there's no mention that the reviews are not accurate, just that they caused the company loss.

What do you guys and gals think?

1 | 2

Hammered
8332 posts

Uber Geek

Moderator

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2943594 19-Jul-2022 08:43

To paraphrase something I try to follow: Never put in writing, anything that could come back to bite you later.

Anonymity is (largely) a myth.

People often mistake me for an adult because of my age.

Keep calm, and carry on posting.

Referral Links: Sharesies - Backblaze -

Are you happy with what you get from Geekzone? If so, please consider supporting us by subscribing.

No matter where you go, there you are.

Beccara

1469 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#2943658 19-Jul-2022 09:32

Defamation cases have been used as weapons for long time, was only a matter of time until someone motivated enough had a need to use them against "anonymous" people

Most problems are the result of previous solutions...

All comment's I make are my own personal opinion and do not in any way, shape or form reflect the views of current or former employers unless specifically stated

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79250 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#2943661 19-Jul-2022 09:44

There are many stories that happened even here on Geekzone. Most won't know or remember but many years ago, back in the Telecom days, someone was posting new plans and phone models ahead of release/announcement. Yes, people were passionate about feature phones running on a CDMA platform but it doesn't matter.

Telecom contacted me asking for details about the poster. Obviously, we did not disclose it - there was no legal reason for that and it would be a breach of the Privacy Act if we disclosed that kind of information if not within the legal reasons to do so.

It doesn't matter. Two or three weeks later Telecom knew who was the person and s/he was terminated. It's not hard for a company to find out things.

sen8or

1787 posts

Uber Geek

#2943853 19-Jul-2022 15:44

Seems the company is trying to pursue old staff for slander / defamation. If what the people wrote anonymously can be corroborated or backed up with evidence, they have nothing to fear, truth (verifiable facts) are a complete defence to defamation. If they can't be, then making defamatory remarks should carry consequences.

irpegg

142 posts

Master Geek

#2943854 19-Jul-2022 15:48

This is why when signing up just put the name Joe Bloggs, then use a rubbish gmail alias to verify the account e.g. abcdef12345@gmail.com then make a post.

kyhwana2

2566 posts

Uber Geek

#2943857 19-Jul-2022 15:57

sen8or:
Seems the company is trying to pursue old staff for slander / defamation. If what the people wrote anonymously can be corroborated or backed up with evidence, they have nothing to fear, truth (verifiable facts) are a complete defence to defamation. If they can't be, then making defamatory remarks should carry consequences.

Except now they're going to be sued so they'll be our tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars in lawyers/court fee's to defend themselves. (Even if they're giving valid opinions/facts/etc)

cruxis

480 posts

Ultimate Geek

#2943863 19-Jul-2022 16:18

Is it not a case of Glassdoor being BS, and ot being Anonymous/Secure and Warrent Proof? They should not even have collected data records to even be usefull when finaly to ordered by a court.

Glassdoor seem like those all BS VPN providers.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

alavaliant

222 posts

Master Geek

Subscriber

#2943865 19-Jul-2022 16:29

I wonder if this might end up being a Streisand effect for Zuru. I'd never heard of the bad reviews prior to this lawsuit. But now now I'm very suspicious of the company....

neb

11294 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2943872 19-Jul-2022 16:56

Beccara:
Defamation cases have been used as weapons for long time, was only a matter of time until someone motivated enough had a need to use them against "anonymous" people

Does NZ have any laws around SLAPP lawsuits? Some Australian states have them but I'm not sure if NZ has any equivalent.

neb

11294 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2943875 19-Jul-2022 17:04

alavaliant: I wonder if this might end up being a Streisand effect for Zuru. I'd never heard of the bad reviews prior to this lawsuit. But now now I'm very suspicious of the company....

And what's more the opinions of (apparently) multiple former Zuru employees are now going to become a matter of sworn testimony and court record, which will inevitably end up in the media. So instead of a site I've never heard of before hosting content critical of a company I've never heard of before, it could make the evening news if they're obnoxious enough about it.

What a footgun.

Edited to add: It's already started:

Glassdoor Alert: Employer Legal Action

This employer has taken legal action against reviewers and/or Glassdoor for the reviews that have appeared on this profile. Please exercise your best judgment when evaluating this employer.

Scott3

3963 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2943877 19-Jul-2022 17:15

alavaliant: I wonder if this might end up being a Streisand effect for Zuru. I'd never heard of the bad reviews prior to this lawsuit. But now now I'm very suspicious of the company....

Very much this.

Hard to see what the end game for the company is. If they take bring the deformation case in a NZ, It is most likely the respondent (assuming they are genuinely an employee) will use Truth, or Honest opinion as a defense. Which will result in further unflattering details begin brought into the public domain.

Obviously a huge pain for the defendant though, who has to resource their defense. Perhaps it is just a gamble that they will settle, by removing the post, and issuing an apology.

In terms of the Streisand effect, all major firms seem to have disgruntled employee's / ex-employee's. Many people feel underpaid / undervalued etc. In isolation this glass-door review did not really have much of an impact on many's thoughts on the firm. But going after somebody who left negitive feedback on glass-door, via the courts in the USA, and then NZ seems slightly unhinged behavior (regardless of outcome of the deformation case in NZ).

neb

11294 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2943880 19-Jul-2022 17:19

Scott3:
In terms of the Streisand effect, all major firms seem to have disgruntled employee's / ex-employee's. Many people feel underpaid / undervalued etc. In isolation this glass-door review did not really have much of an impact on many's thoughts on the firm. But going after somebody who left negitive feedback on glass-door, via the courts in the USA, and then NZ seems slightly unhinged behavior (regardless of outcome of the deformation case in NZ).

I had a quick skim through the Zuru reviews, and then reviews of another company that I know is pretty decent to work for. Zuru actually rated higher than the other company. In both cases the negative reviews seemed to be a small number of people who were upset about something or other rather than an overall trend, since most reviews in both cases were five star.

So it does seem to be a case of someone at Zuru getting butthurt over nothing much, which will now come back to bite them quite badly.

Technofreak

6530 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#2943885 19-Jul-2022 17:28

neb:
Scott3:

In terms of the Streisand effect, all major firms seem to have disgruntled employee's / ex-employee's. Many people feel underpaid / undervalued etc. In isolation this glass-door review did not really have much of an impact on many's thoughts on the firm. But going after somebody who left negitive feedback on glass-door, via the courts in the USA, and then NZ seems slightly unhinged behavior (regardless of outcome of the deformation case in NZ).

I had a quick skim through the Zuru reviews, and then reviews of another company that I know is pretty decent to work for. Zuru actually rated higher than the other company. In both cases the negative reviews seemed to be a small number of people who were upset about something or other rather than an overall trend, since most reviews in both cases were five star. So it does seem to be a case of someone at Zuru getting butthurt over nothing much, which will now come back to bite them quite badly.

Or there's more to this than meets the eye.

If your company is rating well overall why go to this trouble? Perhaps the Zuru evidence is part of a bigger jigsaw puzzle? Jigsaw puzzle being an appropriate term since we're talking about a toy company. 😇

Sony Xperia XA2 running Sailfish OS. https://sailfishos.org The true independent open source mobile OS
Samsung Galaxy Tab S6
Dell Inspiron 14z i5

gzt

17104 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2943924 19-Jul-2022 19:30

The statement indicates Zuru believes the reviews in question were spam and not genuine:

“These proceedings began after a series of fake reviews were posted publicly on Glassdoor,” the spokesperson said. “We are pleased that this spam has now been removed. We cannot comment on anything further relating to pending litigation.”

It's unclear to me if pending litigation the spokesperson referred to is defamation or is a possible appeal from Glassdoor.

insane

3236 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#2943927 19-Jul-2022 19:46

sen8or:
Seems the company is trying to pursue old staff for slander / defamation. If what the people wrote anonymously can be corroborated or backed up with evidence, they have nothing to fear, truth (verifiable facts) are a complete defence to defamation. If they can't be, then making defamatory remarks should carry consequences.

Unfortunately defending a defamation case costs more money than many can afford, irrespective of whether their assertions can be backed up.

Equally the aggrieved won't know whether the review is fake or not until it's tested.

Just a pity there isn't an easier/cheaper arbitrator than the courts that can review evidence before the persons ID needs to be exposed.

1 | 2