Will customers really bother to compare the sneakwrap agreements of competing vendors and choose the one with the best terms? Well, we just had a real world test of that question, and the customers passed with flying colors.
My June 24th GripeLog column examined the remarkable document that at the time was posted as both privacy policy and website usage agreement for Hilton.com and its various brands, such as Conrad, Doubletree, and Embassy Suites. While pretty bad as terms of service go, it was even worse as a privacy policy. Rather than offering any assurances of how it would protect customer privacy, Hilton asserted it had complete ownership of all information collected from customers on its websites to do with as it pleased.
Perhaps because some were still making travel plans for the 4th of July, many readers decided to compare Hilton's terms to those of other hotels. "I was appalled at the disclosure policy for the Hilton Hotels," wrote one reader. "My question is if this an industry standard, or are they way out of the norm. I am staying at a Holiday Inn this weekend, so I popped to their site and read their privacy policy. This looks very good by my review, a further contrast with the Hilton site."
Indeed, not only was there a clear contrast between Hilton and Holiday Inns/Intercontinental, but readers also identified Choice, Marriott, Sheraton, and Westin Hotels as all having reasonable privacy policies in comparison to the Hilton brands. And they didn't just report this to me - they reported it to Hilton, too.
"I have directed my company travel agent to NEVER place me in another Hilton-owned hotel until I receive written notice that you have changed your policy to protect my private information," one reader quoted his letter to Hilton. "I hope you understand that I, and my friends, family, and business associates all consider identity fraud a serious problem, and we are intelligent enough to recognize that your privacy statement is contrary to our interests, contrary to good business principles, and totally unacceptable. I have enjoyed the Hiltons and Embassy Suites I have stayed at. I am sad that I will stay there no more."
Some readers also said they were asking their corporate travel departments to re-evaluate their relationship with Hilton. "These policies are completely over the top," wrote a reader who was one of several pointing out that the terms for Hilton's HHonors frequent visitor program also contain some very dubious privacy provisions. "My department alone spends millions with Hilton every year, and there is no way we will tolerate this if Hilton doesn't change its ways very quickly."
One way or another, it would appear Hilton got the message. On July 1st Hilton and its subsidiaries posted a new privacy policy, separate from its website usage agreement and much more in line with the privacy policies of the other hotel chains. And, while Hilton's revised website usage agreement still has a decidedly UCITA-like aspect in its concept of contract formation, at least the all-your-informations-are-belonging-to-us stuff has been removed. (At this point, however, the dubious HHonors privacy language remains as it was.)
Yes, it's a victory. It's a victory for the reader who first spotted how bad Hilton's privacy policy was (the document as it existed on June 24th can be seen here). It's a victory for those Hilton customers who let their displeasure be known. Most importantly, it's a victory for the idea that shining a little light in the dark corners of sneakwrap agreements can pay dividends for customers. Let's keep it up.
Read or post comments about this story here.
1:01:28 AM 
|
