Ratings sites flourish behind a veil of anonymity - The Boston Globe

30/07/10 3:35 AM

THIS STORY HAS BEEN FORMATTED FOR EASY PRINTING

Ratings sites flourish behind a veil of anonymity

By Sacha Pfeiffer, Globe Staff | September 20, 2006 The phenomenon began with websites like RateMyProfessors.com, which lets college students nationwide evaluate faculty by posting anonymous comments that are often entertaining and sometimes scathing. There's the Bunker Hill Community College acting instructor described as ``a wicked, old, grumpy hermit." Or the Curry College management lecturer who ``dresses like a slob." Or the Tufts University physics professor whose ratings include this succinct advice: ``AVOID!!!" Now, in hopes of replicating the popular and commercial success of RateMyProfessors.com and RateMyTeachers.com, which caters to middle and high school students, the world of online ratings has expanded to law, medicine, car repair, summer camps, child-care centers, real estate agents, nightclubs, and beyond with a network of online forums where the public can rate businesses and professionals behind a veil of anonymity. The sites provide a wealth of easily accessible, virtually uncensored information that can help consumers choose a doctor, lawyer or other service provider. But they are denounced by critics who say they don't provide enough protection from angry clients, dissatisfied patients, disgruntled students, jealous colleagues, or estranged friends and relatives who can use them to post malicious comments, or from manipulation by people who give themselves high rankings to falsely inflate their reputations. ``Too many of these ratings sites are basically forums for blowing off steam, and they're not random samples of how this professor or lawyer or doctor is really doing," said Michael Rustad, a professor at Suffolk University Law School who specializes in Internet law. ``And because they're anonymous there's no way to ensure that a professor or lawyer or doctor or one of his minions aren't doing the postings themselves." Several of the sites -- particularly LawyerRatingz.com and RateMDs.com, where some postings suggest that the rated professionals may have committed legal or medical malpractice -- raise thorny questions about freedom of expression as the fast-evolving Internet tests the boundaries of existing law. The federal Communications Decency Act protects Internet service providers from lawsuits over materials posted by third parties, and most ratings sites permit all but racist or obscene comments to remain online. That means New Bedford lawyer Stephen Swaye has little ability to defend himself against this online comment about him: ``I would recommend a cadaver over this guy!!!" Swaye, who was unaware of the posting until he was contacted by the Globe, said he's letting it roll off his back. ``I believe in free speech, whether it hurts or helps or somewhere in between," said Swaye, a general practitioner in a one-man shop. ``People have the right to express themselves, so by all means go ahead." Conversely, it means Boston lawyer Joel Sowalsky benefits from a top score by a lone anonymous visitor who made this online remark: ``He's a cool dad too!" Asked by the Globe whether one of his children had posted the comment, Sowalsky laughed heartily and said, ``Yes, absolutely." ``It was probably my daughter," he added, ``because I can't imagine either of my sons thinking I'm a cool dad." LawyerRatingz.com, Mechan-icRatingz.com, RealtorRatingz.com, and similar sites that rate music, wine, television shows, prescription drugs, radio programs, restaurants, and more were created by Ratingz Inc., a Sunnyvale, Calif., company founded by Internet entrepreneurs John Swapceinski and Bob Nicholson, who are also developing sites that rate veterinarians, camping and RV parks, and retirement and nursing homes. The sites depend on advertising for
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2006/09/20/ratings_sites_flourish_behind_a_veil_of_anonymity?mode=PF Page 1 of 2

Ratings sites flourish behind a veil of anonymity - The Boston Globe

30/07/10 3:35 AM

revenue. Swapceinski was the original creator in 1999 of RateMyProfessors.com, which he sold last year, and is a part-owner of RateMDs.com and RateMyTeachers.com. The sites rely on volunteer administrators to delete ratings that violate online guidelines, such as prohibitions against obscenity, racially derogatory comments, references to pending legal action, explicit allegations of illegal behavior, and information identifying the rater. But Ratingz Inc. has only about a dozen administrators to patrol its 13 sites, and despite its goal that ratings be reviewed daily, ``sometimes moderators don't get to them for a day or two," Nicholson said. To weed out fraud, the sites screen for multiple ratings originating from the same Internet address or comments containing similar language or sentence structure, which suggest that one person is masquerading as multiple raters. ``Unfortunately, one of the problems with sites like this is that they're magnets for abuse," Nicholson said. ``But we're not trying to hide anything. If you get useful information from the ratings, great. That's what we hope happens. If you look at a rating and say, `Boy, these were obviously all written by the staff in this guy's law office,' then take it for what it's worth." Anonymity for online users and immunity from lawsuits for online service providers is ``absolutely vital to allowing the Internet to function as it does," said Kurt Opsahl, a staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit San Francisco digital rights group. ``You couldn't have services like ratings sites or Craig's List or message boards or Amazon's user feedback or eBay's reviews of sellers without it." Opsahl also noted that many ratings sites offer anyone who feels they have been maligned a chance to post a rebuttal. If they believe they have been defamed, they can also file a lawsuit against the poster if they can determine his or her identity. Practically speaking, that is difficult to do because critiques can be offered anonymously from any computer hooked up to the Internet, where they can exist forever. Nicholson said Ratingz Inc. has never been sued, although it's been threatened with lawsuits many times. ``Hundreds and hundreds of people have told us their lawyer's going to be contacting us, and we've gotten a few cease-and-desist letters from law firms," he said, ``but that's as far as it's gone." Still, detractors warn that anonymity can lead to lack of accountability, and insist the public would be better served if complaints about negligent lawyers, doctors, and other service providers are directed to disciplinary bodies like the Board of Bar Overseers and Board of Registration in Medicine. For now, the sites rating lawyers and doctors have far few visitors than the explosively popular ratings sites frequented by students. RateMyTeachers.com, for example, contains ratings of more than 1.2 million teachers, while RateMDs.com has ratings of 34,000 doctors and LawyerRatingz.com has ratings of only 1,300 lawyers nationwide. But as the sites attract more visitor traffic, the legal issues they raise will become more prominent. ``The body of law right now is on our side, but there's very little court precedent for many of these issues," Nicholson said. ``Really, the test for the law in our society is what's the greater good? Do we want this type of forum to be allowed to exist or not?" Sacha Pfeiffer can be reached at pfeiffer@globe.com.
Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2006/09/20/ratings_sites_flourish_behind_a_veil_of_anonymity?mode=PF

Page 2 of 2