A Polaris Global distributor has deployed tactics mirroring Scientology's "attack the attacker" policy to defend the company, as observed by ScamTelegraph. Lisa Molina recently published a blog post challenging the credibility of critics rather than addressing accusations against Polaris Global, a strategy that shifts focus from substantive issues.
Lisa Molina, a Polaris Global distributor, reactivated her previously dormant blog to publish a post titled "Information or MIS information Age – the internet and Polaris Global." The timing of this publication raises questions, as her blog, part of a wave launched by distributors in September 2009 with the debut of Polaris Media Group, had been inactive since September 9th of that year. Most blogs from this initial surge have since been abandoned.
Molina's approach aligns closely with the controversial Church of Scientology's "attack the attacker" policy. This strategy instructs followers to "banish all ideas that any fair hearing is intended and start our attack with their first breath. Never wait. Never talk about us – only them." Molina's post appears to follow this script by focusing on the critics themselves.
Her primary argument questions the reliability of information sources, specifically targeting anonymous critics. She suggests that individuals unwilling to publish under their real names "may have something to hide." This tactic serves as a deflection, allowing Molina to bypass engagement with the actual criticisms directed at Polaris Global by scrutinizing the identity of the messenger.
This demand for transparency from critics carries significant irony and potential risk. Many individuals who use pseudonyms have valid reasons for doing so. Reports indicate that Polaris Global attorneys have contacted people regarding their blog posts and forum comments. One reader reported that Polaris Global management even tracked down friends on Facebook over company criticism. In such an environment, requesting critics to publish under their real names can be perceived less as a call for openness and more as a veiled threat.
Polaris Global itself has previously demonstrated this pattern. The company launched a website titled "Polaris Global Facts – Due Diligence," which began by attacking the Ripoff Report. The site claimed the Ripoff Report's founder was allegedly in hiding, pursued by the FBI with millions in judgments against him. Rather than address specific complaints about Polaris Global's business practices, the company opted to discredit the platforms where those complaints were lodged.
Such strategies reveal a common operational method for companies facing scrutiny. Instead of providing direct answers to difficult questions about their business, they challenge the legitimacy of those asking. Instead of substantiating the efficacy of their business model, they aim to discredit individuals who dispute it. Molina's blog post offers insight into Polaris Global's defensive tactics, which appear to prioritize pressure and attacks on critics over factual responses or transparency.
What defense strategy did a Polaris Global distributor employ against critics?
Lisa Molina, a Polaris Global distributor, adopted a confrontational strategy reminiscent of Scientology's "attack the attacker" policy, publishing a blog post that questioned the credibility of critics rather than addressing the accusations against the company.
Why was the timing of Molina's blog post considered suspicious?
Molina's blog had been dormant since September 2009, making its sudden reactivation to publish a post defending Polaris Global against critics appear to be a deliberate and timed response to ongoing scrutiny.
What risks do critics face when speaking out against Polaris Global?
Critics risk being contacted by Polaris Global attorneys or management, with reports indicating that the company has tracked individuals and even their social media connections over critical online comments, making demands for real names potentially threatening.
How has Polaris Global itself used similar tactics in the past?
Polaris Global launched a website, "Polaris Global Facts – Due Diligence," which began by attempting to discredit the Ripoff Report and its founder, rather than directly addressing specific complaints about Polaris Global's business practices.