Unethical practices of Byjus and it's impact on education

Nerevarine

Nerevarine

Incarnate
Guys, This thread was under scrutiny by the whitehat jr pr team to get this offline.

You can see redditor poonia had access to their marketing slack channel and they were raising this thread to take action against it.
As a believer in freedom of expression, I do hope you can protect this from their practices.
@Raaabo @Anorion @tamatarpakoda
@whitestar_999 @Desmond David
(Proof : go to 3:30 of this video, video might go down ->
)
 
RumbaMon19

RumbaMon19

Feel Pain.
Nerevarine said:
Guys, This thread was under scrutiny by the whitehat jr pr team to get this offline.

You can see redditor poonia had access to their marketing slack channel and they were raising this thread to take action against it.
As a believer in freedom of expression, I do hope you can protect this from their practices.
@Raaabo @Anorion @tamatarpakoda
@whitestar_999 @Desmond David
(Proof : go to 3:30 of this video, video might go down ->
)
Click to expand...

Is there, any news website/channel which actually reads about all these scams? I saw an article on Forbes regarding this, but no advancement made by any other agency.
 
Desmond

Desmond

Destroy Erase Improve
Staff member
Admin
Man, s*** has really hit the fan for WhiteHatJr. The PR nightmare has just begun and their ORM team is fighting a losing battle blocking posts and videos.

That guy replied to my comment on his video
 
RumbaMon19

RumbaMon19

Feel Pain.
*themorningcontext.com/indias-whitehatjr-is-startup-hell/

Another article, On how a ex-employ was forced to delete all his posts on linkedin about negative experience from WHJ.
 
Desmond

Desmond

Destroy Erase Improve
Staff member
Admin
First thing that needs to go is anti-defamation laws, or at least it needs to be reformed. It's super vague and it's used by companies as an excuse to silence any criticism. Business ethics, etc should be addressed second.
 
Desmond

Desmond

Destroy Erase Improve
Staff member
Admin
We really need some legislation to protect whistleblowers. It would prevent defamation cases from being one-sided. I know it's not possible to have such a law in India but still.
 
Desmond

Desmond

Destroy Erase Improve
Staff member
Admin
I think most defamation cases are simply made to scare defendants. It's very rare for defamation to be real. I think Pradeep has a good case on his hands if he describes himself as a whistleblower in the case. For a defamation case to be valid the plaintiffs must prove malicious intent, which I think does not apply here because Pradeep isn't doing this out of malice, but rather he is calling them out on their shady business practices.

Then again, I am not a lawyer so perhaps a real lawyer can weigh in on this better.
 
Nerevarine

Nerevarine

Incarnate
Desmond David said:
I think most defamation cases are simply made to scare defendants. It's very rare for defamation to be real. I think Pradeep has a good case on his hands if he describes himself as a whistleblower in the case. For a defamation case to be valid the plaintiffs must prove malicious intent, which I think does not apply here because Pradeep isn't doing this out of malice, but rather he is calling them out on their shady business practices.

Then again, I am not a lawyer so perhaps a real lawyer can weigh in on this better.
Click to expand...
In the end, this is india and whoever has the more paid or better lawyer wins.
 
OP
Anorion

Anorion

Sith Lord
Staff member
Admin
hmm wow nice points in this thread

-the child prodigy thing is a little irritating, and media companies sometimes pick such stories and do carry them without understanding the technicalities of what was actually achieved. But a little publicity to a kid who made an app, actually shows what is the most important part of an app, the marketing. Typically what happens in this case is that the kid or the parent of the kid sends out emails showcasing the capabilties of the app, and a few carry them. EduTech companies showcase the achievements of the kids using their platforms and put their PR machinery working.

-calling them fraud is a bit harsh, they can charge what they want to as long as they are clear about their service. So far what they are charging and what they are offering seems like a value judgement that some might find good enough, others not.

-badgering teachers to test their knowledge about things unrelated to the lesson is not actually good form. Neither is just publicly posting videos of a private slack group as some kind of expose. These things are not shady, they are run of the mill. In fact, it is dangerous to post this kind of stuff on YouTube without knowing exactly what you can and can not say on a public platform, which is where these YouTube creators are caught. You need a trained editorial team, with a policy based on legal guidelines to tackle such things The people most in the wrong imo here are those posting these videos.
 
Stormbringer

Stormbringer

Ambassador of Buzz
Desmond David said:
I think most defamation cases are simply made to scare defendants. It's very rare for defamation to be real. I think Pradeep has a good case on his hands if he describes himself as a whistleblower in the case. For a defamation case to be valid the plaintiffs must prove malicious intent, which I think does not apply here because Pradeep isn't doing this out of malice, but rather he is calling them out on their shady business practices.

Then again, I am not a lawyer so perhaps a real lawyer can weigh in on this better.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, for Whistleblower protection, shouldn't Poonia be an employee of the company ? Or anybody who exposes malpractices of an organization is a Whistleblower ?

Note: Not a lawyer.
 
Nerevarine

Nerevarine

Incarnate
I think on legal grounds they haven't stepped on any frameworks, except for misleading or outright conjuration of some kid wolf gupta with zero proof of his existence. That should be enough ground to cover fraud, should a case be made.

The thing is they have played the copyright protection laws like a damn fiddle, and managed to remain completely legal in their activities like banning any dissent from social media.
Google's YouTube copyright notice is made that way where you are guilty unless proven innocent.
Fraud is not the right word to use, but controversial, definitely. Their ORM team must be on some premium weed if they still think they can just outright delete posts continuously without creating some controversy. Anyways, for Google, linkedin, Facebook, twitter to take action they have to modify their existing rules because if they do take action, suddenly there are millions of suppressed voices (whether true or false) who now demand the same.

The best course of action would have been to silently ignore poonia, and let him do his thing but them banning him just added fuel to the fire.

Posting the slack may not have been the right move by poonia, he should have contacted a lawyer before doing it. He needed to pace himself instead of going all out and burning it up. Yes the slack videos generated a lot of attention, a bunch of articles got made but I really hope it reaches a conclusion, i.e. company is penalized.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom