14 Apr PARSHAS METZORA: LEAVING NEGATIVE ONLINE REVIEWS

The Kohen shall
order two live pure
birds, cedar wood,
crimson stuff, and
hyssop to be brought
for the one to be
purified.

Vayikra 14:4
Since tzara’as comes as a punishment for
slander, which is done by chattering, birds
are compulsory for his purification, because
these chatter continuously with a twittering
sound.
Rashi, Vayikra 14:4
Introduction
One of the primary ways in which businesses
can increase their clientele is through positive
online reviews from customers. Conversely,
much of the leverage that the customer
possesses is based on his ability to leave
negative reviews online. Otherwise, there is
often no other recourse for a customer who is
cheated by a particular business, as it is
generally too costly and time-consuming to
legally recuperate disputed money and the
like.

Sharing negative stories about another Jew
constitutes lashon hara under normal
circumstances. Does the fact that one is in a
business setting and is protecting both
himself and others from perceived dishonesty
or incompetence create a heter for one to
share negative information about another
Jew’s business practices?
Lashon HaRa for a Positive Purpose
The Chafetz Chaim, in his sefer on the
halachos of lashon hara (perek 10), shares the
conditions for being permitted to share
negative information about a fellow Jew:
1. One must be certain that the information
is true.
2. The problem that he is revealing is
objectively problematic and not just
something that one finds personally
problematic.
3. One must try to take care of the problem
without spreading any lashon hara; only

after approaching the person one-on-
one can he share the information with

the public.
4. One may not exaggerate the importance

of the particular problem. One should
simply share the information as it is and
let the recipient decide what to do with
it.
5. One’s intention must be to help people
who might be victimized in the future. If
one’s intention is simply to exact
revenge or to establish one’s own
competitive business, it is assur to share
the information.
6. There is no better way to affect a similar
result.
7. One can share the information only if
the loss the subject will suffer is
commensurate with the negative act that
he performed. If he will suffer a major
loss for a minor infraction, one may not
share the lashon hara.
Based on these conditions, it seems almost
impossible that one would ever be permitted
to share a negative review of a Jewish-owned
business on the internet.
Ta’aromes
The Gemara (Bava Metzia 49a, among other
places) describes scenarios in which one
loses out on a business arrangement and
does not have monetary recourse, but
nevertheless has “ta’aromes,” a grievance
or complaint. Rashi explains that this
means he has the right to complain to others
about the way in which the transaction
worked out. This seems to be describing a
scenario in which one is permitted to “leave
a negative review” concerning his
transaction. It is difficult to suggest that
Rashi would permit spreading lashon hara
out of spite; it is assumed that he means
that one can relate his personal experience
to relevant parties, should the need to do so
arise.
What is the To’eles?
If it is indeed permissible to relate one’s
negative experience with a business, what
level of to’eles needs to be accomplished in
order for this leniency to apply? Some
suggest that the productive purpose is
simply the accountability factor. If
businesses know that they will receive
negative reviews for poor or dishonest
work, they will treat their current and future
customers more appropriately, and many
others will thus be saved from losses and
aggravation.
Simply suggesting that one has the right to
reproach the business for its negative
actions in order to teach them the proper
way to conduct themselves is likely not
enough of a to’eles to permit speaking
negatively about them on the internet. It is

not a customer’s job to teach a service
provider the correct manner in which to
behave.
If, however, we assume that one is protecting
current and future clients from being cheated,
not only might it be permissible to leave a
negative review, but it might be obligatory,
based on the obligation of “lo sa’amod al
dam rei’echa” (Vayikra 19:16). One is not
permitted to stand by and watch harm befall
his fellow Jew, even if it is only financial
harm.
Where to Write the Review
Assuming one is permitted to write a negative
review, it must still conform to the rules laid
out by the Chafetz Chaim; it cannot simply
be posted on a general website or social
media account, where it can be seen by many
for whom the information is completely
irrelevant and therefore forbidden to read.
One must leave the review in a location
where it will be read only by those who are
searching for a particular business or service,
to whom reviews are relevant and helpful. An
Amazon review would seem to fit these
criteria.
Rav Hershel Schachter ruled that if one can
find a domain that is generally limited to
those who would benefit from reading
reviews on this matter, and one takes care to
stick to the facts and not to exaggerate or
engage in polemics, it would be permissible
to leave a negative review in order to protect
others from suffering a similar fate.
Reading Negative Reviews
When reading negative reviews, one should
be careful to remember that one is not
permitted to be mekabel lashon hara.
Although one is permitted to be wary of the
situation in order to avoid being harmed or
cheated, he should still harbor doubts about
the authenticity of negative accounts.
Posting Fake Reviews
It is not uncommon that when starting a
business, the owner or his friends will post
positive reviews concerning transactions that
never took place. This is certainly forbidden
and is a violation of geneivas da’as and
sheker.