Reputation Protection on Online Rating Sites

Abstract

The 21st century has witnessed a blossoming of rating, evaluation or even blacklisting sites. Namely, teachers, lawyers and doctors are rated openly by their students, clients and patients. We are living in a ‘reputation nation,’ where our conducts are evaluated often by anonymous individuals in different aspects, entailing the dangers of shame sanctions. This reputation rating system is far from being a system of formal adjudication. It may carry false or incorrect information, and may not allow an individual to correct such information. Relying on defamation law may not be helpful to the victim targeted as the defendant maybe an anonymous individual expressing his honest opinion. Equally, invoking privacy law may be a frustrating experience when the information is of legitimate public interest and it is already in the public domain. In the absence of satisfactory legal solution and remedies, some have resorted to alternative methods of “reputation management.” What has yet to be addressed is the issue of how to develop a new procedural layout that can accommodate social norms, technological advancement and the legal right to protect reputation on online platforms. This article returns to the fundamental rationale behind the protection of reputation, and argues that reputation is an inherently social and relational concept that serves a significant signaling function in society. Drawing on judicial jurisprudence in the US and Germany on online rating sites, this article advocates for a new regime that requires online rating sites to have appropriate netiquette and information policy, including the right to reply amongst other requirements. This is essential not only to protect individual’s reputation but also for establishing a reliable system for civility.