How can you genuinely distinguish what is a valid or invalid review? If we made requests for reviews to be taken down, essentially this would set a very dangerous precedent allowing business owners to essentially request the removal of genuine reviews if they don't favour the business. A lot of the reviews posted from these Year 12 students would seem genuine if we remove the VCAA exam from the equation.
It could just be for like a day period. Remove reviews from the 31st of October to 1st of November (hope no-one else has been doing it since then).
I don't think it would be easy to do it, but if there is genuine reason (as there is, in this case) I think it is okay to risk your very dangerous precedent.
What about bots? What if 500 spam bots left bad reviews on a business? Surely that's another rare scenario in which removal of reviews are warranted.
Eh, I don't agree. I can recall years where students have made FB pages (for example) which takes the mickey out of characters, places, people etc. on the VCAA English Exam. Based on the previous issues the VCAA have had with exams and not checking properly, i'd say it was definitely a forseeable risk which should've been checked more thoroughly.
They should have checked more thoroughly, I don't disagree at all. But making a meme page on facebook taking the mickey, as you say, is different to students actively leaving bad reviews on a real business. I, for one, did not expect that to happen at all. But, I do agree that out of the whole thing, the negligence of the VCAA is probably the strongest and most upsetting part.
Theoretically, but you can post reviews.... whether they be positive or negative.
But they're fictitious. If we are talking about defamation, that's what it is. Spreading information that is not true in order to harm someone.
Long term damage. Review systems have the potential to cause significant long term damage. Would you rather eat from a place that has 5-star glowing reviews or a cafe that has an average of 3-stars and has reviews such as "burnt crappy coffee" etc...?? I know which one i'd be picking, and it isn't the latter.
That's true. They said in the article that they wouldn't know the true extent of the damage until later on, which is also true. But if the reviews were removed, it wouldn't be a problem.
I agree that this is an interesting case. Under defamation, the cafe owners could have a successful cause of action against VCAA. Although they did not intentionally make reference to the cafe, an accidental identification can still fulfil the threshold requirement of 'identification'- one of the elements of a defamation action. So, the test isn't a subjective one. Given that the review is also 'published' by VCAA and capable of conveying a defamatory meaning, the cafe seems to have the upper hand.
This is true. I didn't really think of the actual content of the piece published in the exam (though it wasn't intentionally directed at the business).