Yelp | Report on Failures in Content Governance

Status
Withdrawn
AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
YELP
Lead filer
Resolution ask
Conduct due diligence, audit or risk/impact assessment
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Digital rights
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Technology
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Shareholders request that the Board conduct a stakeholder harm assessment study related to misinformation and false postings on its platform. A report on the Board’s determination of strategically appropriate next steps identified as a result of this study, prepared at reasonable cost and omitting confidential or proprietary information, should be publicly disclosed on Yelp’s website by the end of calendar year 2022.
Whereas clause
As detailed in its Trust & Safety Report, Yelp, Inc. has put significant time and resources into efforts to protect the integrity of its service, reduce the number of false postings on its platform, address false reviews and business vendettas, and manage reviews driven by news articles. However, according to Yelp’s own analysis, the use of false reviews has increased 93% between 2019 and 2020. Yelp’s current content management systems appear to be insufficient against groups that weaponize Yelp reviews to promote misinformation on critical health and public interest issues and seek to harm organizations that are at odds with their personal or political beliefs, such as reproductive health providers and vaccine providers. For example, a number of health-care focused establishments have found themselves victimized by negative Yelp reviews after requesting proof of vaccination from their clients. In addition, Planned Parenthood health centers across the U.S. have been dogged by ongoing posting of unsubstantiated and illegitimate reviews left by cyberattackers on their Yelp pages. They have been spammed with hundreds of the exact same review within minutes. False Yelp reviews may reduce an individual’s willingness to receive needed health care, as well as harm providers through lowered ratings, reduced visits, and employee time-spent reaching out to Yelp seeking remediation. Once an organization has a false review placed on its business page, or pages, Yelp requires each business to manually report each illegitimate user account and/or review. Where providers and businesses targeted with false reviews are unable to undertake this task for significant numbers of false reviews, consumers of their services will likely be harmed. For Yelp, too, dedicating staff time to predictable, recurring vandalism is an inefficient process, increasing operating costs and offering little upside to the organization. Insufficient policies to address weaponized reviews also creates reputational risk and the potential of a regulatory response. Yelp’s practices vary relative to its peers in its approach to weaponized reviews, but are currently proving ineffective to address this growing problem. It is in the best interest of Yelp, its investors, and our broader society if Yelp takes effective practices to prevent, and is no longer viewed as a venue to make a stance on, personal or political beliefs through false reviews.
Supporting statement
It is recommended that Yelp seek to engage harmed businesses in meaningful discussions about their experiences and desired alternative approaches.

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.