The Good, The Bad, And The Ugly
Service being reviewed:
ZOOTOO.COM
Reviews: 395 |
Posted: 1 year ago |
Avg Rating: 4.5
Supporting Shelter: Pet Adoption League
Supporting Rescue: Community Angel Network
Pros: Informative site about pets and pet products/services
Cons: Navigational problems; Too Many Vague/Meaningless Reviews
(A) THE GOOD:
(1) True to its slogan, zootoo does contain a wealth of information about "all things pet" and has something to offer to just about everyone.
(2) Zootoo is a great site for animal lovers and animal advocates--as well as animal neglectors/abusers--to learn from each other and, hopefully, stop the abuse, avoid each others' mistakes, and eventually lead to the improved welfare of all animals.
(3) Pet product and service reviews enable potential consumers/customers to make more informed decisions and possibly reduce the number of unfavorable/wasteful purchases as well as regrettable visits to unworthy service providers. Moreover, such reviews can enable manufacturers and service providers to ascertain consumer needs and respond to valid complaints or areas of concern.
(4) Each zootooer has his/her own profile page and seemingly endless opportunity to upload photos of pet(s) for the world to see and to enjoy for oneself. In many ways, it is the "MyPetsSpace" that will surely be a rival of MySpace and similar sites.
(5) Pet news stories featured every day bring interesting and informative articles (sometimes with accompanying videos) about animals to readers' attention and make zootooers aware of what is happening, what is being done, what needs to be done, etc. Zootooers can comment on the stories, offering advice, criticism, support, or other constructive feedback
(6) All registered zootooers with at least 100 points are eligible to receive free sample(s) of various pet products. This gives pet owners an opportunity to test products before buying them and thereby knowing whether or not future purchases are desirable.
(7) Zootoo is currently conducting a shelter makeover contest wherein the top 20 point-earning shelters will receive a makeover--one up to $1 million, one worth $10,000 and the remaining eighteen worth $5,000. Thousands of shelters across the U.S. are competing and, regardless of which shelters get the highly-sought-after makeovers, numerous homeless animals will be the real "winners".
(B) THE BAD (or "not so good"):
(1) The zootoo site is envisioned as nonbiased, user-generated evaluations of products, but there is no way of ascertaining the various views of what warrants a rating of 1,2,3,4, or 5. Some reviewers seem to be easily satisfied and overly generous in awarding a "5"; other reviewers are overly critical/judgmental and perhaps unjustly award only a "1"; still other reviewers give an arbitrary rating (often a 5!) for products/services they have NOT tried. There seem to be way too many products receiving a "5", suggesting that many reviewers are not very analytical and thereby fail to offer the products' drawbacks (which most, if not all, products have).
(2) While many zootooers post orderly, meaningful, and quite enlightening comments to the pet news stories, there is often little "discussion" per se but, instead, numerous zootooers posting random thoughts that are redundant (sometimes profoundly so) and/or add nothing to the existing comments. Discussions should have more structure and the lack of the same suggests that some--though not all--commenters are only interested in earning points, not truly contributing to the "discussion" at hand.
(3) The site can be difficult at times to navigate and the message "zootoo is updating your page" may appear for a long time, resulting in substantial delays. There have been problems with the "submit", "reply", and "back" buttons, to name few. Computer glitches can be expected and are understandable, but they are also areas that could be improved.
(4) On various locations of the site, the points for uploading a photo are inconsistently stated and therefore unclear and misleading. In some spots, it states that uploading a photo is worth 20 points, at other spots it specifies one must upload a photo of one's pet using a product to receive 20 points, and at another spot it states one will receive "up to 20 points" for uploading a photo. I have learned (through experience of uploading photos only to later have some of the points deducted by zootoo) that zootoo apparently determines which photos are acceptable; I have had more photos REJECTED than accepted and, in essence, have often received no points whatsoever for my effort.
(5) It is difficult to conduct a search for a specific product or service. Instead of getting a single match for a very specific product, the search results are numerous and vague to the point of not being able to find that specific product within a reasonable time or at all. Any one word listed--as well as words NOT listed--may show up in the search results. Furthermore, some identical products are listed more than one time, possibly leading to unintentional duplicate reviews.
(6) There is often inadequate manufacturer information and product descriptions, which may (and does) result in misidentification of products on the part of reviewers. That is, some zootooers--whether intentionally or unintentionally--are evaluating a product other than the one portrayed. For example, instead of rating a particular pet bowl, some reviewers are rating any type of pet bowl they may have used and giving "generic" evaluations. This, of course, is not useful to potential consumers and is a disservice to the manufacturer (not to mention zootoo).
(7) The shelter makeover contest is indisputably a strength of zootoo, but--to help meet zootoo's "unbiased" goal--there are a number of shortcomings worth mentioning:
(a) The need to rank in the top 20 to be eligible for a makeover invites or encourages some people with otherwise good intentions to abuse the point system yet there doesn't appear to be a foolproof way of detecting these people. Many people apparently are engaging in less than noble practices to boost their points, leaving competing zootooers disgruntled and feeling helpless and hopeless
(b) There is justified concern that small shelters in small towns can't compete at the same level as their opposites can. Stated differently, the people in the smallest shelters can put forth more time and energy yet attain only a small fraction of the results that a large shelter can attain with minimal effort. People--and the media--are most likely to support their local shelter, not an unknown (but needy) shelter in a neighboring community or county.
(c) The "digital divide" can interfere with the ability to get supporters. Shelters in some locations (typically poorer) may find relatively few people with computers and internet access. People may be willing--but unable--to help. Moreover, some people who have computers may not have (or know how to use) digital cameras to upload photos so are more limited in how they can contribute to earn points. Ironically, the shelters in the wealthiest communities may APPEAR to be the "neediest".
(d) Too many people are functionally illiterate and/or scatterbrained to verify their zootoo registrations. These people show up as "supporters" but do not receive the 100 registration points and the shelters lose out on points they thought they had coming and need to make progress (or show for their recruitment effort).
(e) There is too much emphasis on a "body count" and not enough emphasis on what each supposed supporter is doing to demonstrate his/her support. That is, thousands of disinterested--even disconnected--people may take a few minutes to register under a shelter but do absolutely nothing else in support of that shelter. Many of them (i.e., thousands!) might even claim that they will volunteer (to receive another 100 points) yet have no intention whatsoever of doing anything. Other people do as much as they can to earn points (while truly volunteering at the shelter) but can't accumulate as many points as the combined deadbeat "supporters".
(f) There isn't enough information clearly posted about how to legitimately earn points. For example, many zootooers apparently do not realize that they have to actually TRY the products/services before reviewing them. (Yes, this may be stated somewhere in the rules, but please refer to "d" above about functional illiteracy.)
(C) THE UGLY:
(1) People who post rude, offensive, vulgar, and/or deliberately hateful comments that serve no legitimate purpose. (Fortunately, these are rare.)
(2) Zootooers who manipulate, lie, cheat, etc. to increase their points.
(3) Immature children who "play" on zootoo and unwittingly may be jeopardizing their shelters' accounts and potentially destroying the opportunity for a $1 million shelter makeover.
(4) Parents who knowingly allow their children below 13 years of age to register (or themselves register ineligible children)
(5) The people responsible for the animal neglect/abuse that is featured in the pet news stories/videos...and the people who want to be cruel to those culprits. There's no such thing as "cruel to be kind".
I'm sure I'll think of other things, but this should suffice. In case some of you are thinking this is too long, it is ONLY 9191 characters and 25000 maximum is allowed!
***
GO ZOOTOO! GOOD LUCK SHELTERS!
Review Helpfulness
21 out of 25 users found this review helpful. Did you find this review helpful?
Reply
by gregw
1 year ago - Flag this
Thank you for taking the time to post your insightful message. Yes, I read all 9,000 words, twice. The 'bad' and the 'ugly' certainly gives me a lot to think about. All members need to take the product reviews seriously. It is very disturbing to see junk food and potentially dangerous treats, especially for house rabbits, labeled as 'nutritious' by reviewers. As a 'mom' to 16 rescued kitties, seniors and speaial needs, and 2 house rabbits, I appreciate your honest efforts on Zootoo. Pats to all your beautiful rescues cats and good luck to your shelter.
Ann//seniorcats