Shamecasting recommended in CNN Opinion Article

[Matthew Chan]

With the recent infamous Comcast debacle, bloggers and journalists have come out in droves expressing their approval of Ryan Block's strategy of fighting back Comcast (clearly a much larger entity) through "shamecasting". More specifically, Ryan Block unilaterally decided without asking anyone's permission to start recording this offensive phone call with Comcast for the purpose of openly sharing and shaming Comcast. And it absolutely worked.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/18/opinion/wheeler-comcast-call/index.html?hpt=hp_t3

Some people might say what Ryan Block did was technically illegal. After all, he did record the phone call without Comcast's position.  But if Comcast attempts to even prosecute or file suit against Ryan Block, there is no question the Streisand effect would kick in and folks on the Internet would move in on Comcast.  There will be little sympathy or support for Comcast as Ryan Block is clearly the victim who had to tolerate obnoxious behavior.

Comcast is infamous for bad customer service and their ongoing price-gouging ways. It would not take much for people to literally stage a revolt against Comcast. The onslaught by the Ryan Block's "shamecast" has triggered a hatred for cable companies and Comcast in particular.

Likewise, Getty Images and their ilk are absolutely hated by the thousands around the world.  And with each letter they send out, they increase the strength and army that would like to see them put out of business altogether.

It is bad enough to receive extortion letters but one does not have to tolerate obnoxious threatening phone calls. Of course, the easiest thing to do is to simply NOT accept phone calls or speak to anyone you do not know.

[lucia]

Many states are 1 party consent.  If both parties live in such states if the party recording is one of the parties involved in the call, recording phone is entirely legal.  The case is more ambiguous in 2 party consent state where one could end up in a dispute which state law prevailed in any suit. I live in Illinois which previously was two party consent, but that law was thrown out the window by the Il. Supreme Court. 

If someone wants to start this practice, they can keep a list or two party consent laws.  When dealing with a customer representative ask: Where are you located. If they are in a one party consent state and you are also in a one party consent state, you can feel free to record.  If they are in a two party consent state, you can ask permission to record.  (Or for some states, simply stating you are recording is sufficient; for others you must get consent.)

Interestingly enough, these customer service representatives are often already being recorded by their employers. Their system will tell you that you may be being recorded for "quality control purposes".  You could, of course, tell them that you wish to record for precisely the same reason.  Don't expect their company's policy to permit them to grant you permission to record simply because it is their policy to record!  (I had a go around with Sears. See http://rankexploits.com/musings/2014/how-i-got-sears-to-send-me-warranty-parts-i-hope/  I did ask to record and was told I could not do so.  I should note: all service people who I actually spoke on the phone were polite enough. In my opinion, Sears's problems are with the higher ups who dictate what their service personnel can say or do.  I wanted to record to be able to air a video that documented precisely what Sears customer service representatives did say when someone tried to obtain parts under warrantee.  )

[Greg Troy (KeepFighting)]

I was thinking the same thing about the quality control or training purposes message.

[Matthew Chan]

Ryan Block didn't ask for permission. He was frustrated and figured the only way to solve this problem was to get proof he was in this ridiculous position. No one in customer service is going to give permission. They have little to gain from it but it is obnoxious that they have a right to record you under the auspices of "training purposes".  Sometimes, there is no other way to solve the problem but to make the phone call and you are forced to being recorded. In that regard, turnaround is certainly fair play as far as I am concerned.

Of course, Timmy Mack (Timothy B. McCormack, our well-studied outside Getty lawyer, favorite ELI screenshot photographer, and ELI distortion field historian) is going to get a screenshot of this new thread with Lucia's more conservative view claiming that I am once again using my "cult leader" status "inciting" ELI readers into "illegal behavior" once again despite the fact that journalists and bloggers around the world are simply on fire over the Comcast debacle. Let us also remember that Ryan Block is a tech journalist who probably has more experience than me in blogging and he CHOSE his course of action to freely disseminate for the greater good.

[lucia]

Ryan Block didn't ask for permission. He was frustrated and figured the only way to solve this problem was to get proof he was in this ridiculous position. No one in customer service is going to give permission. They have little to gain from it but it is obnoxious that they have a right to record you under the auspices of "training purposes".  Sometimes, there is no other way to solve the problem but to make the phone call and you are forced to being recorded. In that regard, turnaround is certainly fair play as far as I am concerned.

Of course, Timmy Mack (our well-studied outside Getty lawyer, favorite ELI screenshot photographer, and ELI distortion field historian) is going to get a screenshot of this new thread with Lucia's more conservative view claiming that I am once again using my "cult leader" status "inciting" ELI readers into "illegal behavior" once again despite the fact that journalists and bloggers around the world are simply on fire over the Comcast debacle. Let us also remember that Ryan Block is a tech journalist who probably has more experience than me in blogging and he CHOSE his course of action to freely disseminate for the greater good.

Matt,
I understand why Block recorded.  I think he was wise to do so. 

Also, on another thread, I also pointed out that Illinois became 1 party consent not because our legislature changed it's mind but because the Il. Supreme Court deemed the 2-party consent law violated the US constitution (specifically the 1st amendment).  In that regard, the IL resident who was charged under the law could not be convicted because the law itself was found to be null and void.  It's possible that ultimately other state courts will hear cases involving their own 2-party consent laws, or one of these will get to SCOTUS, and SCOTUS will rule those laws inapplicable as well.     Should that occur, then retrospectively any claims that those who recorded were exhibiting "illegal behavior" will be similar to claiming Rosa Parks was "breaking the law" when she sat in the front of the bus. She was violating a statute on the books at the time.  But the statute was ultimately thrown out and in direct consequence of her having violated it.

A similar thing happened to Illinois 2-party consent law.  Will that happen elsewhere? I don't know.

That said: even if these 2-party consent laws are ultimately thrown out,  knowing that law suits are time consuming, and pursuing them can interfere with people lives, relationships ability to make a living and so on, I think anyone recording should do so with their eyes open.   

Saying that, 'open eyes' also means knowing that in some states there are cases where 2-party consent becomes 1 party consent. For example: if the person recording is doing so to get proof of illegal activity.  I don't know what happens if they thought illegal activity was going on, but fail to get the proof.  But especially because Block is a reporter, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn he'd investigated FCC or any other applicable laws to learn precisely what laws governed customer service, recording of phones and knew both where the Comcast rep and he were located to make sure that he knew his recording fell inside the letter or the law. It is simply more prudent to do so.  One feature of that particular recording is Block waited 10 minutes before he began recording-- it may be 10 minutes was 'important' based on some rule, and Block may have made sure he had a witness in the room (which is perfectly legal.)  You don't really know-- and it does pay to do "belt and suspenders" sometimes as it can avoid the ordeal of multiple visits to courts-- all the way to SCOTUS. Even if you prevail, that's an ordeal!

So... yeah I do like to advocate caution where possible.

If Timmy takes your post as an attempt to exert your 'cult leader' status over the rest of us.... well, I guess I'm just not an obedient follower. Because I do like to make sure people know what risks might exist and do things with their eyes open. If they want to risk having to SCOTUS hoping to prevails, bravo. But some people prefer more boring lives!

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

ok I'm derailing this thread!! While we all like and find the "nicknames" of certain players cute and funny, and we know they will see them, I think since we are also known as "google bombers" and using SEO tactics to get better search engine reach, I think it's important and part of our duty to continue to use proper names when needed..

We wouldn't want  Timothy B. McCormack from McCormack Intellectual Property to be disappointed..

[Peeved]

Since it's been "derailed"...

I'm going to jump in as well and agree that Timothy B. McCormack is indeed ELI's "favorite ELI screenshot photographer".

Is it my constitutional right under the First Amendment to
LAUGH OUT LOUD? I think so.

[Matthew Chan]

Under Section 230 of the CDA, I do not accept responsibilities for any part of this comment as I did not make it. The doctrine of "respondeat superior" also does not apply because there I have no employer/employee relationship or a master/slave relationship with Peevey.

But wait.... I see a "quote fragment" that can be used for a potential defamation charge "Timothy B. McCormack... is....ELI's...Photographer".  That statement is absolutely false and will cause irreparable damage to his professional reputation.  ;-)

Oh no! Google's index will be triggered because our sophisticated SEO forum software might associate his name with "respondeat superior", "master/slave", "defamation", "asshat", and "butthurt". 

Maybe he will write another wondrous "amicus brief" about an alleged "worldwide hate campaign" using "obscene", "misogynistic" language. 

Since it's been "derailed"...

I'm going to jump in as well and agree that Timothy B. McCormack is indeed ELI's "favorite ELI screenshot photographer".

Is it my constitutional right under the First Amendment to
LAUGH OUT LOUD? I think so.

[Peeved]

Why thank you Matthew, I forgot to add my usual "disclaimer" of "sarcasm". Let the record state officially that Timothy B. McCormack is NOT "actually" ELI's "photographer".

Also I should note with regard to Robert's statement that I believe the "appropriate" word is "accused" verses "known".

ok I'm derailing this thread!! While we all like and find the "nicknames" of certain players cute and funny, and we know they will see them, I think since we are also known as "google bombers" and using SEO tactics to get better search engine reach, I think it's important and part of our duty to continue to use proper names when needed..

We wouldn't want  Timothy B. McCormack from McCormack Intellectual Property to be disappointed..

[Robert Krausankas (BuddhaPi)]

Good catch Peeved..the word i should have used is "accused"... That fuck-tard Timothy B. McCormack ( fuck-tard being my opinion, can I still have that here?) doesn't even have a clue what  "google-bombing is..

From wikipedia for the "uneducated"

The terms Google bomb and Googlewashing refer to the practice of causing a web page to rank highly in search engine results for unrelated or off-topic search terms by linking heavily. In contrast, search engine optimization (SEO) is the practice of improving the search engine listings of web pages for relevant search terms.

It is done for either business, political, or comedic purposes (or some combination thereof).[1] Google's search-rank algorithm ranks pages higher for a particular search phrase if enough other pages linked to it use similar anchor text (linking text such as "miserable failure"). By January 2007, however, Google tweaked its search algorithm to counter popular Google bombs such as "miserable failure" leading to George W. Bush and Michael Moore; now, search results list pages about the Google bomb itself.[2] As of May 1, 2014, the first result in a Google search for "miserable failure" is this Wikipedia article, defining Google bomb, although at least four of the following results show links related to Bush. Used both as a verb and a noun, "Google bombing" was introduced to the New Oxford American Dictionary in May 2005.[3]

Google bombing is related to spamdexing, the practice of deliberately modifying HTML to increase the chance of their website being placed close to the beginning of search engine results, or to influence the category to which the page is assigned in a misleading or dishonest manner.


Please Note ELI does NOT
1. Post unrelated or off-topic search terms by linking heavily.
2. Deliberately modify HTML to increase the chance of their website being placed close to the beginning of search engine results, or to influence the category to which the page is assigned in a misleading or dishonest manner.

and contary to what some may believe, we do not use sophisticated software or methods to get good google results, it's really quite simple..ELI has good relevent content that people search for on a daily basis, the results come naturally.

Seattle based lawfirm McCormack Intellectual Property can thank me later for this pro-tip of the day..

[stinger]

Who is this Timothy B. McCormack you all keep talking about?

Are you referring to a blue movie porno star?

When I google that name, I see some odd images.  Does he really sell turd polish?  What's a copyright cow? I saw some homophobic comments.  Are all these the accomplishments of one fellow?  If so, I have some friends who might like to meet him.

But not if he's that guy from Seattle that allegedly represents Getty images that these forums keep talking about.

[stinger]

Robert, when you intend to quote something from any source, you should enclose the actual quoted text in quotation marks (""), to set it apart from anything you are writing, and to make clear to readers what exactly is being quoted.

Now I for one thought the quote was clear when you led with

From wikipedia for the "uneducated"

, but I would never want to see you leave yourself open to an accusation of plagiarism.

You never know if the plagiarism trolls are watching.

[Peeved]

Glad Robert chose to clarify further regarding the "false" accusation regarding "Google Bombing".

I predict there will be more "clarifications" regarding false statements and accusations
made by none other than Timothy B. McCormack in the near future.

[Matthew Chan]

As a follow-up to "shamecasting", the onslaught and backlash against Comcast is fierce.  People are recording their calls into Comcast with regularity to help hold Comcast accountable and prove to others about their crappy experiences and pushy service.  Comcast is very aggressive, hated by many, and tries to put on a pretty but pretty shitty people behind the scenes.  Does that sound familiar?

The most powerful "weapon" to beating your adversary is collecting the dirt and embarrassing facts and sharing it.  We have a First Amendment right to gather such information and report it on an open forum.  Plenty of great phone recording apps on Google Play. I assume there are a few iPhone side.

(Oh wait, I sense a "warning letter" or "complaint letter" coming from Timmy Mack (of McCormack Legal infamy) that I am "inciting illegal activity".)  He is going to invoke my so-called "cult leader" status. Sure, it's so "illegal" that all these Comcast complainers are being prosecuted by the District Attorneys around the country.  Because we know that the highest priority is to prosecute consumers/end-users who record their crappy customer/end-user experiences  and sharing their complaints publicly.

It's so "illegal" that there are NUMEROUS free or phone recording cheap apps available for Android (and likely Apple) phones.