Fed up with DS -- Quitting!!!

[prosaic]

I have no dog in this fight, but I have to say that if a company like Demand Media, with more than $355 million in venture funding behind it, is going to start lawsuits against small websites like Writer's Weekly for writing a reader-based editorial on experiences with DS, then there is something seriously wrong with upper management at DS/DM.

[Midnight]

Like I said, it's just an unverified rumor but the damage one or two blatant lies can make to a business can be financially devastating.

At some point, everyone should be accountable for what they say. The truth is always the best defense against libel charges but if someone specifically targets a business and lies to damage their reputation, should they not be asked to at least verify the truth of their charges?

I'm not sure why you would be afraid to say something about a company if it was true?

I will speak out against anything I feel is unfair. But I won't lie about it and I won't make things up.

I thought about what you said, that it would be PR suicide for DS. Maybe so. Maybe not. I read that entire - tedious thread on DS and it appears that most of the writers there defend and support the company. And many of them dispute what the emails to Angela state. I didn't send a positive or a negative email to Angela. I didn't even know the issue was going on until today through an email sent to me.

If you ran a company and someone lied about you, trying to ruin your reputation, what would you do?

Forget about it?

I'm not decided what I would do. It might depend upon the fallout. And the intent.

But, I think this might be interesting to watch and I'm going to pop some popcorn.

[Midnight]

Originally Posted by prosaic

I have no dog in this fight, but I have to say that if a company like Demand Media, with more than $355 million in venture funding behind it, is going to start lawsuits against small websites like Writer's Weekly for writing a reader-based editorial on experiences with DS, then there is something seriously wrong with upper management at DS/DM.

Okay, duly noted.

But I think some companies are beginning to crack down on those who intentionally defame them. But I'm not accusing Angela of that. Of course, she just published what came to her.

My guess is that DS will not sue anyone, but what would you do? If someone damaged your company with lies? What would be your response?

And what if it kept happening? Would that make a difference to your response?

Or would you just tuck your tail between your legs and let them continue?

I'm being serious as I ask - I really want to know what you would do.

Because this raises an interesting question.

[WAHbird]

Originally Posted by Midnight

I'm not sure why you would be afraid to say something about a company if it was true?

Because I don't want to face retaliation in the form of termination. Because I wouldn't want to have to defend my words in court should DS decide that they think I'm lying to harm them. Saying that you're willing to voice your opinions and speak the truth looks good on paper, but unfortunately, not everyone wants to hear the truth.

Originally Posted by Midnight

If you ran a company and someone lied about you, trying to ruin your reputation, what would you do?

Forget about it? I'm not decided what I would do. It might depend upon the fallout. And the intent.

I would consider litigation if I knew I could meet the legal standard (i.e. that I knew my company had been harmed deliberately and maliciously, and I knew I could prove in court that I had sustained actual damages as a result of this person's behavior.)

I would not, however, under any circumstances, publicly announce anything about subpoenas or lawsuits until my legal department had filed the paperwork with the court. In a slander or libel case, one of the worst things things a prospective plaintiff can do is act and speak in a way that harms their own public perception even further. That could put the metaphorical nail in their legal coffin when it comes time to show that they would have good reputation if not for the defendant. I hope that the subpoena rumor really is just a rumor.

In my opinion, DS should be putting on their happy, writer-loving damage control face right now. There's not much else the can do for the time being.

Regardless, I'm also interested in seeing how this is going to play out. For everyone's sake, I hope it can be resolved amicably.

[Midnight]

I think you're probably right WAHbird, I don't think DS would announce any type of legal action before the actual defendants were notified. To do otherwise would be counterproductive. That's why I stated "unverified" rumor to begin with, because I can't imagine anyone would know about something like that.

You made me think of something when you mentioned "termination." And that is that I think most companies WOULD terminate an employee if they felt they were damaging them financially.

I still would not let that stop me from telling the truth, however. Because if they did terminate me for telling the truth - then I would be the one with the legal case, wouldn't I?

But I won't pretend this doesn't interest me, because it does. You make some good and valid points.

[WAHbird]

Originally Posted by Midnight

I think you're probably right WAHbird, I don't think DS would announce any type of legal action before the actual defendants were notified. To do otherwise would be counterproductive. That's why I stated "unverified" rumor to begin with, because I can't imagine anyone would know about something like that.

You made me think of something when you mentioned "termination." And that is that I think most companies WOULD terminate an employee if they felt they were damaging them financially.

I still would not let that stop me from telling the truth, however. Because if they did terminate me for telling the truth - then I would be the one with the legal case, wouldn't I?

But I won't pretend this doesn't interest me, because it does. You make some good and valid points.

Don't get me wrong, I agree that most companies (including DS) would and should terminate any employees/contractors that are causing them harm.

The problem is, there's often a fine line between venting about an employer and being malicious. I think it's a little more cut and dry in traditional workplaces where employees can commiserate in person and not leave a written trail of their frustrations for the entire Internet to see. There, the workers' intent is usually obvious. Here, not so much.

Under current at-will employment laws, companies can fire workers for almost any reason (or no reason at all). You would have no legal recourse if you were let go for telling the truth about the company.

This is interesting stuff, I know I'll continue to watch both the "official news" and other writers' opinions closely.

[debng]

Originally Posted by WAHbird

Regardless of whether Demand Media has a cause of action against Ms. Hoy or her readers, I think that subpoenaing email records would be PR suicide. For the most part, I enjoy writing for DS, but would not so much as log into their site again if I found out they were involving the legal system in this petty battle.

After all of this, I'm starting to feel afraid of voicing even constructive criticism for fear of losing my writing privileges there. I know I can't be the only writer who feels this way.

I don't think DS wants their reputation to turn in this direction.

If there's one thing I HAVE learned about DS it's that they really want to know what their Creators think. They spent days listening to us and learning what can be done better. I think if you're respectful in your criticism you'll be fine.

[Midnight]

That's good to know, Deb.

I haven't experienced any of the problems that some wrote and I appreciate you taking the time to come on here and set the record straight.

One thing that I've noticed on DS and other writing sites is that there is a whole new generation of writers who think whoever buys their articles owes them something.

In fact, sometimes they act like the whole world owes them something, instead of taking the attitude that they must work hard to develop a good reputation.

I'm glad you're working with DS. I sent a friend to your site to find the DS link. Keep up the good work.

[TiffanyB]

I'm not sure what "lies" you are speaking about? These were emails from her readers on their opinion of DS. How can a person's opinion be "lies?"

It's amazing how a little money can change a person's attitude in a heartbeat!

[Midnight]

Ok Tiffany, good question.

I opened up the site and found this right away. This is an example of what I would call a "lie." But ONLY if it cannot be proven to be true.

This doesn't sound like a "My opinion is...." It sounds more like some wild accusations.

This got me to thinking and I Googled internet libel law yesterday. Check it out sometime. It's kinda scary what you can be sued for if you state things about a company or a person that aren't true.

"Demand Studios says they're "quality driven." But, they need to pay writers a higher rate for the hell that we go through to meet their "quality driven" standards. Half of the editors are clueless and work on their own set of rules; no two editors are on the same page about the guidelines. A lot of DS writers have gotten rewrites because something in our article was a "pet peeve" of the editor. Another extremely common situation is that the editor sees the article titles (which are typically very general and can be written several different ways) from a different perspective and forces you to scrap your article and write a new one tailored towards their point of view, or risk losing payment.

See what I mean?

Is that kosher?