Getting Schooled on Game Design

"Peter Brig wanted to warn others about the problem he had with the computer storage discs he purchased from Newegg.com. But when he tried to post a product review on Newegg's Web site, the company rejected his submission. Twice. ... Frustrated, Mr. Brig voiced his dissatisfaction with Newegg's review process on ResellerRatings.com, where customers provide feedback on online retailers. Within days of his posting, a Newegg representative contacted Mr. Brig by telephone, apologized and offered him a full refund for his purchase. ... While Mr. Brig was glad to receive the refund and continues to shop on Newegg, he says: 'I still don't know if I truly trust their review process.'"

Sites that offer customer reviews have to work hard to make sure they are not freely posting abusive comments, but in some cases legitimate negative reviews were scotched because they were, well, negative.

"Overstock.com Inc. recently overhauled its review policy. The Web retailer had been relying on its merchandising group -- the employees responsible for deciding which products to sell on the site -- to monitor reviews submitted by customers, but found that the group tended to approve only positive reviews. In January, the Salt Lake City-based company changed the monitoring responsibilities to its marketing team. The company now says it posts both positive and negative comments, as long as they are constructive," the Journal reported. "'We learned that customers won't trust the site if there are only positive reviews,' says Tad Martin, senior vice president of merchandising and operations at Overstock. He says the company also pulls products that receive overwhelmingly negative customer feedback."

Katherine Harris: Not Camera Ready?

U.S. Senate candidate Katherine Harris is blaming technology on her perceived image problem. The GOP congresswoman from Florida told syndicated radio host Sean Hannity that several newspapers doctored her images to distort her makeup, the AP reported .

Here's something she told the AP earlier this year: "It was like in a comic strip. They actually had blue eye shadow on front pages of newspapers and I haven't had blue eye shadow since Girl Scouts in seventh grade. Not only did I consider that there was a little bit of bias in the writing, but just the fact that they would even play with my photograph is beyond the pale."

Kenneth F. Irby, visual journalism group leader at the Poynter Institute for Media Studies, told the wire service that "the development of digital photography in recent years has made it easier to manipulate photos. As a result, he said, newspapers have tightened their ethics policies prohibiting such practices and have fired people for making even minor changes in news images. That makes it unlikely that newspapers did what Harris is charging, he said."

I have news for Harris: Her photos might be fodder for the late-night talkshow hosts, but it's hardly the reason that Democrats want to sink her Senate plans. As the AP noted, Harris "became a hero to Republicans when she oversaw the disputed 2000 ballot count that gave George W. Bush a crucial 537-vote victory over Al Gore in Florida. She was elected to Congress in 2002 and reelected last year."

On an end note, anyone that sensitive over newspaper photos is going to get roasted alive 100 times before breakfast if she ever gets her Senate seat.

Send links and comments to robertDOTmacmillanATwashingtonpost.com.