We've also heard the Better Business Bureau tell us, over and over, that if a deal sounds too good to be true, it probably is.
Which brings us to the pitched battle between The Consumerist and Cash4Gold that revolves around the former writing about (and linking to) a former employee's litany of methods in which the latter engaged in an effort to ensure maximum profitability for Cash4Gold, and anything but "top dollar" for the jewelry owners.
Essentially, Cash4Gold is playing the "shut up" card, claiming that the information provided by the former employee is false and defamatory. "Not so!" claims the fired associate, while The Consumerist resists legal intimidation tactics that would limit their ability to do what they do - track and report on customer service, consumer, and business practice complaints.
It's also appalling how cavalier the Florida court systems are in dealing with this, executing default judgments and restraining orders that appear to contain details not in the original complaints while ignoring responses previously submitted by at least one of the defendants.
Quite an interesting story, and one that might have slipped below the surface and sunk to a watery grave had it not been for Cash4Gold's legal maneuvers and The Consumerist taking a strong stand while demanding proof. Cash4Gold's actions in this matter perfectly demonstrate the Streisand Effect.
If you are so inclined, go read the full story, and pass it along. Advertising is expensive, so let's give Cash4Gold some free publicity.
No need to thank us, Cash4Gold.
Image by Joi via flickr
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please tell me what you think.