Comments on: When Social Media Attacks http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/ Internet Business and Marketing Trends Sun, 08 Nov 2009 02:26:59 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.2 By: WebProBlog - Internet Business and Marketing Trends» Blog Archive » Overstock.com Comes Clean http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/#comment-7246 WebProBlog - Internet Business and Marketing Trends» Blog Archive » Overstock.com Comes Clean Mon, 15 Jan 2007 17:48:58 +0000 http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/#comment-7246 [...] Recently, I posted an entry about social media attacking - a post focusing on the AntiSocialMedia.net blog that many felt was developed solely to harass critics of Overstock.com. [...] […] Recently, I posted an entry about social media attacking - a post focusing on the AntiSocialMedia.net blog that many felt was developed solely to harass critics of Overstock.com. […]

]]> By: Lou Lawes http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/#comment-7040 Lou Lawes Sat, 13 Jan 2007 15:04:10 +0000 http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/#comment-7040 Judd Bagley has admitted that he is antisocialmedia.net. This has raise a number of very serious legal issues for Overstock. http://www.dealbreaker.com/2007/01/sleazey_mcsleaze_admits_to_sle.php#more Judd Bagley has admitted that he is antisocialmedia.net. This has raise a number of very serious legal issues for Overstock.

http://www.dealbreaker.com/2007/01/sleazey_mcsleaze_admits_to_sle.php#more

]]> By: Lou Lawes http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/#comment-5881 Lou Lawes Wed, 03 Jan 2007 19:41:33 +0000 http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/#comment-5881 I couldn't disagree more. This was an anonymous blog engaged in, for the most part, ad hominems concerning a critical journalist. What ASM was/is engaged in here was the lowest form of cyberstalking. This carries with it potential civil and even criminal penalties. Further, perusing the reaction on the Internet indicates that this website has been fast and loose with the facts, to say the least. See http://garyweiss.blogspot.com/2006/11/baloney-brigades-assault-on-wikipedia.html which discusses how one of ASM's primary allegations was convincingly refuted. Yet ASM continued to repeat the proven false allegation. The above calls into question not just the wisdom but the legality and morality of this project. I couldn’t disagree more. This was an anonymous blog engaged in, for the most part, ad hominems concerning a critical journalist.

What ASM was/is engaged in here was the lowest form of cyberstalking. This carries with it potential civil and even criminal penalties.

Further, perusing the reaction on the Internet indicates that this website has been fast and loose with the facts, to say the least. See http://garyweiss.blogspot.com/2006/11/baloney-brigades-assault-on-wikipedia.html
which discusses how one of ASM’s primary allegations was convincingly refuted. Yet ASM continued to repeat the proven false allegation.

The above calls into question not just the wisdom but the legality and morality of this project.

]]> By: Lloyd Schorr http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/#comment-5872 Lloyd Schorr Wed, 03 Jan 2007 19:05:20 +0000 http://blogs.webpronews.com/2007/01/03/when-social-media-attacks/#comment-5872 The real question might be how a company should respond when unfairly attacked. If you read that blog you begin to see that it's more about making those who've used their own anonymous blogs to attack overstock.com, whether right or wrong I'm not sure, to take some ownership of their words. Should different rules apply to companies and individuals? I think this is a much more complicated question than it appears to be at first blush. The real question might be how a company should respond when unfairly attacked. If you read that blog you begin to see that it’s more about making those who’ve used their own anonymous blogs to attack overstock.com, whether right or wrong I’m not sure, to take some ownership of their words.

Should different rules apply to companies and individuals?

I think this is a much more complicated question than it appears to be at first blush.

]]>