Yelp Sides With Racist Stalker Restaurateur, Bans Customer From Warning Others

Yelp Sides With Racist Stalker Restaurateur, Bans Customer From Warning OthersYelp Sides With Racist Stalker Restaurateur, Bans Customer From Warning Others
The Yelp Inc. logo is displayed in the window of a restaurant in New York, U.S., on Thursday, March 1, 2012. Yelp Inc., the site that lets users review everything from diners to dentists, is set to price it’s IPO tonight and could potentially raise as much as $100 million, which would value the company at about $838 million. Photographer: Scott Eells/Bloomberg via Getty Images
Looks like the saga of Ninja City vs. Ruchu Tan has yet to end. In a surprising turn of events, Yelp has apparently banned Ruchu Tan from posting on Ninja’s City’s page, as well as deleted his updated review where he noted the racist and threatening messages he received on his personal Facebook from owner Bac Nguyen after giving the restaurant a one-star review.
About three hours ago, this was posted on the Facebook group Boycott Ninja City.
Screen Shot 2014-10-31 at 8.30.10 PM
It’s no secret that Yelp has notoriously been known to manipulate reviews. Though the company has continuously denied it, it’s certainly hard to trust them when they get the court to rule that it’s perfectly legal for them to change reviews in exchange for money.
Yesterday, Bac Nguyen posted a formal apology on his company site. Since then, it looks like Ruchu and the Facebook group has forgiven him, but not without rebuttals (colored in red) of his own.

Bac Nguyen,

We have received your response and commend you for taking steps to hold yourself accountable for your past misconduct.

We accept your response and we will no longer ask people to join, share, or continue the boycott.

We however make the following observations regarding your public statement

1.         “I said some really stupid things… I did act crazy,irrational, and said some horrible things.”
a.       We perceive this as your concession that you made threats of violence, sexual and racial slurs, personal attacks.

2.         “However, I am not a racist. I work with and employ people from all different ethnic backgrounds. One of my business partners is an Indian American woman, and she has provided the following statement on my behalf.  I thank everyone who has reached out to me regarding the issue of me being racist, as people who know me personally know that this is not the case.”
a.       We are not asking you to apologize for being aracist.  We are asking you to apologize for making racist comments. Trotting out your Indian American business partner to declare that you are racism-free does not justify those comments or make them any less racist and sexist.
b.      These are facts that will never change and always be offensive.  Reference to a woman of South Asian descent as “Punjabi puss” is a racist and sexist comment.  Reference to a woman as a “bitch,” “an ugly piece of shit,” or an “ugly Asian bitch” is sexist.

3.         “I mistakenly assumed that the negative review was written personally and maliciously, and I was wrong. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I don’t expect every single person to love our food.”
a.       We appreciate that you acknowledge that you made this assumption.

4.         “Shortly after my outburst, I provided both a written apology and a video apology, which I am now sharing out of respect.”
a.       This is a confusing statement. At the crux of our boycott, we took issue with the fact that AFTER you sent the written apology and the video apology, you CONTINUED to harass and taunt Ruchu, hashtagging Ruchu as a “fraud,” posting his full name, and even mocking the boycott campaign on your restaurant’s public social media sites.
b.      We do not know who or what you are “respecting.” You shared your written apology and video apology, NEGATED by your subsequent continuing harassment. Sharing the apologies you contradicted afterwards with your actions only serves to win you sympathy points and further lead your supporters to believe that you were unduly targeted by Ruchu and this campaign.

5.         “Ruchu – I have also reached out to you directly one more time as well, as I feel like I still owe you a face-to-face apology for both my original reaction as well as any subsequent actions on my part. However, I completely respect your decision if you’d still rather not meet.”
a.       Clarification: you sent a direct email to Ruchu, October 30, 2014, at the same time you posted this public response.
b.      From September 10, 2014 through October 29, 2014, you did not directly communicate with us or Ruchu.

6.         “I’ve learned from this situation and will work to handle criticism better, and to control my temper.”
a.       We perceive this to be your (albeit vague) plan of action.  We commend you for it and believe your plan will increase your success as a business owner.

We find the most disturbing aspect of your apology is that it skirts around the fact that you continued to harass Ruchu and mock the boycott campaign after you sent your apologies. This is the basis on which our boycott and group was founded. However, you do address it significantly in your direct email to Ruchu, so that will be accepted and posted.

We, again, commend you for taking steps to own and learn from your past misconduct.

We will update those who approach us with your response and our acceptance of your response.


Clevelanders Against Consumer Intimidation

To follow this saga, click here.
Share this Article
Your leading
Asian American
news source
© 2024 NextShark, Inc. All rights reserved.