[Anonymous]

[BusinessTraveller]

Please note that the thread concerning the above hotel has been temporarily removed from the website, until such time as we can gain a right to reply from the hotel.

[VintageKrug]

Hmm.

Is that at the hotel’s request as a condition of gaining a response? I think there is little reason to remove such a thread pending a response from the hotel, but I await their response nonetheless.

Here is tripadvisor on which Prof Gupta has set out his issues for all to see:

http://www.tripadvisor.com/Hotel_Review-g186338-d254579-Reviews-La_Suite_Executive_Hotel-London_England.html

[MartynSinclair]

BT

Interesting position to take, removing a thread. Has there been some inacurate reporting?

I look forward to hearing more. We often make mention of the openess of this forum. Please can the moderator (presumably BT) explain what circumstances casue a live thread to be removed?

Many thanks

[BusinessTraveller]

To confirm, no request has been made by the hotel to remove the thread.

We made the decision to temporarily take the thread down from the site, as some of the comments made were potentially libellous. We are in the process of contacting the hotel regarding the issues raised, and if appropriate we will reinstate the thread at a later date.

The forum has been running for nearly three years and this is the first time we have removed an entire thread, so you will appreciate we do not take such action lightly.

[Tom Otley]

Hello,

We have removed the thread, yes.

You ask the question, has there been inaccurate reporting? The answer is, there hasn’t been any reporting. This isn’t an editorial story we have run, or an expose we have published after investigating. Instead we have simply provided a forum (literally) where serious allegations have been made about a hotel. They may be true, they may not, but I’m afraid we aren’t in the business of publishing unsubstantiated allegations about companies.

VK points out that these have been made elsewhere on the web. That’s a matter for TripAdvisor. We have asked the hotel to comment and we’ll see what happens, but we have no means to compel a hotel to reply, and its reluctance to do so doesn’t make it “guilty”.

More generally:

1. Although I know some members of the forum would like us to become consumer champions, we do not have the resources to chase down every complaint or bad experience highlighted by forum posters and that isn’t what the magazine or the website are about. We have an “Ask Alex” column in the magazine where Alex McWhirter chooses the most interesting letters and complaints and tries to help. Those single pages take weeks to investigate and write.

2. More practically, it is very difficult to get involved in a “he said, she said” situation after the event. We are not the police, and we cannot go down to the hotel and start interviewing “witnesses”. At best if we think the particular case highlights a wider issue, we would use it as the basis for a story on the subject

3. I am also wary of the forum turning into a complaint list with forum posters asking (or demanding) BT to get involved in seeking redress for posters (and I’m aware that this is not how this forum post started, but it soon turned into that). I’m not sure it would make interesting reading, and since sooner or later we all have bad experiences, it could take over the forum.

4. Lastly, imagine you work in the travel industry, and have a dispute with a customer. There is correspondence on either side. The dispute continues, and then one day you find on the web the whole thing laid out on Business Traveller forum. Are you then forced to argue it out in public, with all the possible damage that would do to your company’s reputation? Or do you stay silent and hope it goes away? Or do you just issue a lawyer’s letter to the forum that is publishing it to your potential customers?

The forum wasn’t set up to put individuals or companies in that position, and it isn’t a kangaroo court. As I said above, I am quite happy to publish stories that our journalist’s have researched, but this isn’t one of them.

Tom Otley

[MartynSinclair]

Dear Tom

I have only known this forum as a “speakers corner” type forum. If BT are unable to get involved then just say so.

As far as the comments being made, if any contributor is placing BT into a difficlut position, by the style of their posts, then a short email to that individual should suffice. I include myself in those comments, cos I know I will never be awarded a UN position for diplomacy.

Having been a major contributor to the removed forum, I am aware of what was written. However, I would have thought the racists comments made on another live thread should have been taken more seriously than a “spat” between an extremely nice UK visitor and a hotel. The question about the credit card being copied, should be directed to the fraud squad if the hotel continues its silence, of course not wishing to inply quilty by silence!

I have also noticed that there is no policing where contributors change identities. This is not a personal vendetta over one poster, but quite clearly, we have today seen the rebirth of a new contributor in the same style as the one who contributor left recently. Clicking on the name confirmed the fact that the most recent posts were the first two under that ID. May be this is good as it provides the opportunity for the contributor to rejoin under another name and modify his posts, maybe its bad because there are some unsavaoury characters only posting for personal reasons.

I have no issues with BT policing a forum within their web site as well as having no issue with BT removing threads – the only suggestion i would have is that BT now publishes a Business Traveller guide to what is considered acceptable and unaccetpable.

Finally and most importantly, personally I do not agree with everything that has been written and posted. All i do know is that thanks to one poster, my company was able to save a significant amount of money having been provided with a travel solution. None of us are (at least i dont think we are) travel journalists or travel reporters, in the main, just plain boring business and leisure folk, using the forum for both serious issues concerning travel and light hearted banter. I cringe when there are personal insults flying about and smile when contentious issues are discussed becasue many contrinutors have kept their positions within business hidden, but rest assured some or positioned very well to report on issues that even your own editors or reporters may on occassion (very few occassions I hasten to add) miss.

BT is a wonderful publication, i dont subscribe becasue I get my copy in the BT lounge. Lets hope that this first blip is the only blip and full normal service will resume.

Thank you BT for giving the travelling public and readers of your magazine the opportunity to converse in cyberspace and I for one hope that the forum will continue will all the regular contributors and plenty of new ones.

Kind regards

Martyn Sinclair

[JonathanCohen09]

Hi tom,

thanks for the clarification. i just wanted to say that i totally endorse all that Martyn has said above.

Best regards,

Jonathan

[NTarrant]

Hi Tom

I also fully agree with Martyn. What I would say is that if you do feel the need to remove a post, it would be useful to know why a post has been so removed. You removed one of mine, but I know that there was nothing offensive in it.

Kind regards

Nigel

[Prof.Gupta]

I had been travelling for last two days and on my return, what I see on the forum is an unexpected turn of events. Disappointing to see that this thread got removed (and I am still not sure why) but I am sure BT has its reasons and I respect their stand. It was surprising that even after the removal of this thread, when some discussion on this topic has been taken place, why I stopped getting e-mail alerts (about a new post) which I was getting before the thread was removed? Is it because the title of the thread has been modified? I just logged in (without an altert in my mail) to check and what I saw was a complete turn of events.

What I had posted was an experience (and not exactly a complaint). A detailed complaint had already been sent repeatedly to the hotel (and this experience posting on the forum captured a brief summary of experience and incident). IU still maintain that i did it for the larger interest of travellers and not for any other reason. I am also happy to see that many readers found this post valuable and in line with the spirit of this forum. They supported this discussion and took it forward. To be fair to the hotel, the complaint (and reminders) to the hotel were sent well in advance and only after a complete silence from them, this matter was posted on this forum and one more. Being a professor, I always believe in fairness and correct reporting of facts (as I see them) and being a teacher I will always stand for values, principles and justice. When others support me in that, it is a tremendous encouragement and strength. And if someone takes a stand to not to be part of this, then I value their stand as well. Let me assure BT and the Site administrator that none of what I posted was mechanism to get your support to solve my problem. I have suffered and that is over. Nothing can be done about it (as of now) but the posting was for sharing an expience with others (who vale such a post). If I needed help in policing, I know where to go! Best regards. Gupta

[VintageKrug]

I do agree with that, Gupta.

I don’t think anything was libellous [against the hotel in question] (as that seems to be the core of the reason for removal) as we have no evidence it wasn’t legitimately posted and accurate. But I think TO is better positioned than I am to decide on that point.

The allegations are in the public domain now on other sites so I don’t think there is any risk to BT for publishing the views of a private individual on a forum.

Perhaps a more prominent BT disclaimer at the top of the forum would alleviate the issue?

I appreciate that you don’t have unlimited resources, but by censoring one consumer (even though there was inference a criminal act had been perpetrated), that sets a precedent for censoring any comments criticising any firm with which we interact. It actually makes more work for you than leaving be.

I also recognise that you have taken a conscious decision not to be a consumer champion (other than in an oblique way), and I certainly understand that position.

But that doesn’t mean there isn’t an opportunity to highlight certain threads to interested industry parties who might be able to shed light and/or challenge the issue for themselves. You have already done this regarding Cathay’s twisted arrivals lounge access policies at LHR

Tripadvisor for instance allows management of hotels to refute any unfounded allegations quite successfully, flyertalk has airline reps posting who recently denied rumours that bmi was shutting down diamond club, for instance, so it works both ways.

I know you have a significant legal background, Tom, so if you have taken action you are no doubt acting based on your knowledge of the Law, and libel in particular.

However, I think most forums are understood to be just that – platforms for free speaking individuals to set out a case, and not representative of the organisation hosting the forum.

[MartynSinclair]

whilst highly respectable and extremely professional, isnt BT being a teennny weeeeny bit naive. Here is a most wonderful publication, with stories, editorials, passenger experiences, cost cutting measure, topics of all interest covering the range of travel services from A – Z, with Industry recognized leaders making contributions within the publication. The spread of readers too is extremely broad, from a lesire traveller to vertain pompus and particluar travellers, talking about tea to Vintage Champagne, coach and train modes of travel to private jet hire.

Of course an open forum with such a cross section of people and services is going to generate healthy discussion, which like any thing good, may on occasion spill into the excess of “over indulgence” thats the beauty of debate and thats the beauty of open discussion.

I recognize that BT have the ultimate right of cencorship on their own web site. but to say recouses are not unilimited and that BT are not trying to be the “consumer champions” starts to my small mind wondering, what an earth is BT all about.

We all highly regard the content and the contributors, but it is inevitable that if one reader favours “champers” (poor lack of English) and another favours Ryan Air (I am sure we can find one happy O’Leary customer) – if one wants to catch us a budget accomdation and another prefers 5 star luxury, then there is bound to be lively discussion and thats what makes this site so healthy.

I hope that BT will encourage this forum and accept that cyberspace generates these kinds of discussion.To act as moderator without any publised notices, makes me feel that the forum is being policed in such a way that nobody really knows the rules or even if their are any.

As VK points out, there are other public and open forums where discussion gets even livlier.

I think BT needs to nip this in the bud and explain (which is entirely up to them whehter they do so) becasue it would be a shame if the collective group of professional and social travellers are silenced due to a thread about how a respected overseas Professor was treated by a hotel in London.

BT – if you need an extra pair of hands to assist in running this site, i will gladly donate my time free of charge, to provide assistance in any format you require and with any reasonable conditions attached as I am sure others would also volunteer.

I will admit that when travelling to the 4 corners (well actually 3, i dont go to all 4), i enjoy BT and this forum, it brings realism back into my crazy life of being away from home.

Come on BT, head up – lets get this forum back up to full speed ahead…………..

[Tom Otley]

Thanks for that.

Just to be clear – the postings would not be libellous against BT but might be potentially libellous against the third party company.

The fact that something is in the public sphere doesn’t make it any less libellous, and there have been many famous examples when a piece has appeared in one magazine and been ignored, then picked up by mainstream media, published, and only then does the libelled party take action (for obvious reasons – makes the libel more widespread when published by mainstream media, gives it more credence , or, more cynically, the target then becomes worth pursuing for damages).

The law seems to be that if a libel appears on the site we have a duty to either (a) remove it when we see it or (b) remove it when asked to. Since the main defence against libel is “Justification” (meaning – roughly – “I might have been wrong for publishing it, but I believed it was true” I’m only likely to be able to afford myself of that defence if I’ve taken efforts to do just that – and in this case, and in others, we haven’t.

We are currently putting a Terms & Conditions-type posting together which we will try and direct people towards.

I agree with the rest of what you say – Up To a Point, Lord Copper.

[Tom Otley]

and….

MartynSinclair,

Thanks for the kind comments.

What is BT about? Well we aim to make your travelling life easier/ and/or less expensive, while being entertaining on the way.

The forum is there for readers to give each other useful advice.

One man’s “over-indulgence” is another’s nightmare. We have had several forum users ringing up distraught about the way they have been treated on this forum. Others have asked for their profiles and every post they have ever made to be deleted (and by the way, under Data Protection Laws, we have to comply).

This talk of free speech is fine, but I’ve made the point elsewhere, it’s only free to those reading it, we have to pay the price – of hosting the forum, paying the journalists running the site (and writing the stories), and possibly paying legal fees and libel damages.

If we decide to remove a thread or post, we often notify the poster, but not always – it’s partly resources, and partly because we reserve the right to do so. Every poster we have deleted has had a written (email) warning.

It’s very kind of you to offer your services and we have hopes to be able to have moderators on the site, but the software doesn’t currently allow it. It also (often) doesn’t make things easier, because as I found out on another forum, when a moderator moderates a user, they often don’t like it and appeal upwards and you get involved in moderating the moderator.

As for the other meaning of “free” speech, obviously just about everything you read – here and elsewhere – has been “censored”. It’s been selectively commissioned, written with an audience in mind, edited by a third person and then passed for publication, possibly by a fourth. Deleting posts, threads and banning users occurs on every forum.

That said, of course we are grateful for you all posting such informative and entertaining posts. Of course we use it to suggest editorial ideas. We often follow up specific complaints about FFP programmes or hotel bad practice or a hundred other things. But if a post is “Company X cheated me” we are not going to publish it. The web is full of that sort of thing, I agree, but it’s not going to appear on this site.

[VintageKrug]

My error, I have edited to make it clear who the libel would be against, I meant to say BT might be held responsible for publishing that libel.

As I recall – in Evelyn’s Waugh’s excellent “Scoop” to which you refer the “agree up to a point, Lord Copper” line was ironic, and used when he disagreed, but didn’t want to say so openly (Lord Copper not being the sharpest knife in the drawer).

Which is odd, as I think you do actually agree with the broader sentiments of what MS and myself (and others) set out.

I agree it would get boring if it was just a whinge site though. [thought I might have spelled that incorrectly!]

[Author]

Posts