Share
Bookmark and Share

Erin Andrews case could have greater impact on hotel industry
 

22 December 2009 9:42 AM
By Stacey Mieyal Higgins
Managing News Editor
stacey@hotelnewsnow.com
 

REPORT FROM THE U.S.—The case of the privacy violation of Erin Andrews has been making headlines since this summer when word got out of the peeping Tom who managed to get confidential information about the ESPN reporter from various hotels and then record videos through her guestroom peephole.

But it wasn’t until the eve of her accused stalker’s guilty plea to a deal last week that Andrews’ intentions to improve hotel security came out in a USAToday blog. Her attorney, Marshall B. Grossman, of Los Angeles-based Bingham, McCutchen, said in the Hotel Check-In blog that Andrews plans to seek civil remedies against hotels and the related parties involved, push for stronger laws against what her stalker did, and advocate for changes in all hotels that would protect the traveling public.

“Any legislation attempting to address this issue would have to be pretty comprehensive,” said Stephen Barth, president and founder of HospitalityLawyer.com. “This issue has a number of variables … and I am not sure the public really knows what went on yet and how he executed the videos.”

Attempting to prevent this specific offense from happening again, it seems, is still a gray area. While front-desk confidentiality certainly will be addressed by hotels, the peephole tampering and filming is not fully understood by the hotel industry, according to Joe McInerney, CEO of the American Hotel & Lodging Association.

“Our security committee has talked about it,” he said. “They have been debating how the footage could be obtained, with the way peephole was done, how that switch could have been done.”

But it’s not a time to overreact to the publicity of the case or Andrews’ suggested security improvements, McInerney said.

“We need to find out what [Andrews and her attorney] are looking for,” he said.  “Many hotel companies have already instituted stronger employee training. There has been a tremendous amount of discussion.”

Industry response under way

Of three hotels allegedly involved in this case, two have been named: the Marriott Nashville (Tennessee) at Vanderbilt University and the Radisson Airport in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. A third hotel in Columbus, Ohio, has not been identified. Seven of the videos published on the Internet allegedly were filmed at the Marriott Nashville, according to media reports.

Jeff Flaherty, director of public relations at Marriott International, confirmed that the Nashville property was involved and was a franchised location, but declined to share ownership details.

He said the company responded to the situation and reviewed guest check-in policies, which have been modified so a request to be in a guestroom adjacent to another guest must be approved by the guest before it would be honored. Flaherty also said Marriott is working with housekeeping staff to try to better equip them with the ability to report anything out of the ordinary.

Cathy Enz

As for specific plans for her safety crusade, Andrews is focused on the criminal proceedings for now, Grossman told HotelNewsNow.com. “The plans are in the formative stage. The focus to date has been to resolve the criminal proceedings. They should be resolved with the sentencing in late February.”

Yet, it can hardly be assumed that every hotel would have made the same mistakes that led to these privacy violations.

“Erin may have found herself at properties that individually were not that sterling,” said Cathy Enz, the Lewis G. Schaeneman Jr. Professor of Innovation and Dynamic Management and a full professor in strategy at Cornell University.

“This isn't really a brand standard safety defect,” she said. “It’s much more intuitive; it’s the human element. That's the other problem—you have to sense what might be the problem, you have to be able to read people at the front desk. It could be someone creepy, but also they could be tired and disheveled.

Enz recently conducted a security study on the U.S. hotel industry. Read “US hotels vary in physical measures of safety.”

Deterring future stalkers

Among Andrews’ security improvement suggestions: cameras in every hallway; better employee training; guest consent before assigning adjacent rooms; and improved hotel peepholes.

Replacing every hotel peephole might not be economically feasible, but safety and security are always a priority, McInerney said.
However, improvement of security and safety in hotels will never be a bad thing, Enz said.

“In this situation, the hotel made several series of errors, and what she's asking for in terms of cameras in hallways—I wouldn't mind a little bit more security in the interior of hotels.”


Page: 1 | 2

Bookmark and Share

1 Comments
Show All

28 December 2009 at 11:48 AM EST
In response to: Erin Andrews case could have greater impact on hotel industry
LT commented:
As important as this issue is, the same thing will hold it up as continues to interfere with credit card and identification issues; most people just aren't willing to go through much inconvenience to ensure security. They are frustrated by the security measure put in place to protect them and hound hotel employees until standards are relaxed. They will be frustrated by whatever further inconveniences this might put in place and the same thing will happen. Until guests realize, and accept, that hotel employees cannot tell the "good guys" from the "bad guys" and allow those employees to enforce security procedures, this cannot be completely prevented. Not convinced the guests themselves are causing much of this problem? Then; 1) Why is it such a bother to provide a credit card authorization along with a photocopy of back and front of your card when you are giving a credit card over the phone? Don't you realize that if we don't ask you that anyone with your card # could use it? 2) Why do you get mad at the front desk clerk who can't issue you a new key when you lock your key AND your ID in your room? Would you want anyone who asks for your room key and can give your name, address, phone (whatever else we might try to verify you are who you say you are) to be able to get it? 3) If your photo ID says William R Smith and your reservation is booked under Bob Smith (because that's what you go by) with no address (because you booked online), why should we let you into what could be someone else's room? 4) If you call for Room 908 and we ask you to verify who is in the room but you cannot give us the name of the person who is actually registered, why do you get mad at us? Hotels already have a lot of measures in place to protect guest security but guests don't like them because they are bothersome or inconvenient so they belittle innocent desk clerks, cause scenes in public areas or write nasty comments online. How do you expect the hotel industry to enforce something even more strict? Until these measures are treated by guests as customer services and not inconveniences, it will be difficult to make improvements in this area. The hotels are ready and willing; the guests are often not.



Login
Or enter a name to post your comment:

Post Your Comment

(4000 charcters max)
Protected by FormShield
Refresh
Listen
Please enter the characters shown on the image


Enter the characters you see in the box above, then click submit to post your comment

HotelNewsNow.com encourages reader participation. The opinions expressed in comments do not necessarily reflect the opinions of HotelNewsNow.com or its parent company, Smith Travel Research and its affiliated companies. Please report any violations to our editorial staff.

Comments that include profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, solicitations or advertising, or other similarly inappropriate or offensive comments or material will be removed from the site. You are fully responsible for the content you post.