FTC announces proposed rule banning fake reviews and testimonials
ftc.gov
ftc.gov
> It is an unfair or deceptive act or practice and a violation of this Rule for a business to represent, expressly or by implication, that a website, organization, or entity that it controls, owns, or operates provides independent reviews or opinions about a category of businesses, products, or services including the business or one or more of its products or services.
As I read it, the 5-star review systems on Amazon.com and Walmart.com would be categorized as unfair under this rule, since both companies sell their own products in addition to having a rating system on their website. I'm not sure whether that's intentional or not (and I could be misreading it, IANAL).
[0] https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/r311003consumer...
IMHO it could be a good, kind of, separation of responsibility.
This isn't about user reviews, it's about editorial reviews where it is the website/organization itself that is doing the reviews. Think Wirecutter, Consumer Reports, and so forth (although those are fine).
Basically when you search Google for reviews on e.g. an air purifier, you'll find a bunch of sites called things like "air-purifier-reviews.com" that seem to be a legitimate review site/blog at first glance (like Wirecutter), but are just a fake site created by the company whose products are recommended.
Amazon and Walmart with their product listings and user reviews aren't anything like this. User reviews even for Amazon-branded products would continue just fine, although another rule indicates that Amazon couldn't selectively remove negative reviews for their own products (not that there's evidence they have, since there are plenty of terribly-rated ones alongside the good ones).
It's also clear that Amazon wouldn't be able to e.g. create its own Wirecutter or Consumer Reports equivalent as long as it continued its own brands. And it probably means that Amazon wouldn't be able to continue its "Amazon editorial recommendations" which is a row that used to pop up in search results, but that they removed a couple of months ago [1].
[1] https://www.modernretail.co/technology/amazon-has-quietly-re...
Well, in reality they are.
This is literally designed to kill vpn review websites. All the major ones are owned by a couple of vpn mills
Can they "Sponsor" a site, and put a little tiny disclaimer on the bottom of the page, where no one ever looks, indicating this is sponsored content?
…but wouldn’t this description also include Amazon, with Prime brands at least? It sort of implies a separate site which would mean Amazon is fine, but it doesn’t say it outright.
In a state of desperation, I looked for locksmiths in my area. First Google ad that popped up for “Locksmith Redmond” seemed like a reputable website. To confirm their credibility, I looked up their Google reviews: 400 five star reviews.
I requested the service, and twenty minutes later some dude turns up in a Ford Escape. He proceeds to “open the car” and quotes me $299 on the spot for simply opening the door.
If you’ve dealt with anti theft on these Toyotas, you know this solves nothing. You can’t get into the trunk without disabling it.
I refused immediately: are you insane? He started getting aggressive with me. It’s me and this dude, alone in a parking lot at 10 PM. Dude’s twice my size, I was terrified. Long story short, he didn’t get the money.
It was a scam, a bait and switch. In my state of nerves, I fell for the reviews. I took a look at the reviews after the situation was resolved.
Clearly fake reviews: same writing style, similar names. Only two or three people who actually exposed the scam.
I’m a very tech savvy guy. I got screwed by fake reviews and Google ads this week. I have a feeling this measure won’t stop them.
Think of a clerk at your local EBT office submitting a 5 star Google review saying "Excellent customer service and low wait times, [your coworker here] was caring and compassionate, just make sure you schedule an appointment online to avoid the lines!" or "I've worked here for X years and I cannot say enough great things about how wonderful and caring everybody is! I love helping the undeserved in my community!"
Maybe it's a car repair shop doing the same. Maybe it's a fast food franchisee. Maybe it's a boutique store. It's definitely more than just Amazon or TripAdvisor reviews.
I intend to present this proposed rule to my current management and let them sweat, because just this week I was told it is "highly recommended to help offset the fake reviews". I understand the struggle, though. People leave shitty 1 star reviews for spiteful purposes all the time, and that can hurt a small business or encourage unnecessary community discontent.
I don't think there is any good solution on the SEO aspect, but I'm all for banning the scummy practices of astroturfing.
And that's how government tends to work.
I'm pretty sure Amazon knows best of all what's going on, but stays quiet because they're generating insane profits.
Crazy story: https://www.kleinbottle.com/Amazon_Brand_Hijacking.html
I think they are focusing on getting rid of deception...
There is an opportunity here (and I’m not sure what it looks like) to get products in the hands of people who will be incentivized to review honestly because the maker of the product actually wants to earn organic, positive reviews and will take the issues noted by reviewers seriously for improving upon the product.
That dialog is the only update they've made to the portal in years. In fact it still doesn't support MFA at all. But reviews!
Those are just slaps on the wrist. You know what’s not a slap on the wrist? Caning. Caning would force these scammers to rethink their lives. It is used in Singapore as a punishment, a country widely seen as one of the least corrupt on the planet.
And as far as I can tell most of the police beatings are irregular, not regulated, and applied without judicial prescription or medical oversight. American police beatings are also usually legal or at least decriminalized however.
It's a review of that classic 90s sub-genre of FCC, Net Neutrality. This is Net Neutrality 2015: Nettier and Neutrier, with Michael O'Rielly.
Esteemed Chair O'Rielly's performance was fantastic as always. After the entirely authentic acting in the fake-out heist classic between President Obama and Tom Wheeler in the 2014 installment, O'Rielly really steals the show here with his honest portrayal of concern for free speech.
Four stars. A slamming success as always.
I really can't wait for the upcoming FTC show of "Automated Robo-caller Deleters from Outer Space". It will be dealt with in a balanced and classy manner as the posters claim. An honest reflection on space PBX robots and what they experienced.
Do you want a sarcastic parody world? Anyways, this gets us closer to authenticated users everywhere, so that's actually a good thing. Many lives will be saved that day.
I know of a couple.
I also see people hurt who were chased from communities, or are drawn into these kinds of things right here instead of just working on what they love.
Wonder how many of these will survive to the end? I guess one good thing is that the participants are not something like ISPs vs the public, more like business vs business.
From what I can tell, Chinese companies hire companies in India and Bangladesh to boost reviews. They then act like middlemen, seeking out pay for play reviewers in other countries. It's funny because they pretend to be Chinese women in their profiles. After chatting one lady 'Eve' up, basically saying I knew they weren't Chinese by the way they wrote English, he admitted to being a young man from Bangladesh, though I forgot his name. I thanked him for his honesty.
I was sent a spreadsheet of multiple items to choose from. Clicked on a few, and saw a couple 'Top 10 Reviewer' labeled folks making reviews on these unheard of products. So the 'all stars' of Amazon are all in on it.
All this is separate from the multitude of companies who put little cards in their packaging offering a rebate for a good review.
Garbage all the way down...
> From what I can tell, Chinese companies hire companies in India and Bangladesh to boost reviews. They then act like middlemen, seeking out pay for play reviewers in other countries.
It’s quite easy to spot fake reviews by anyone, since they’re formulaic. I.e the review must mention <person name> or <product name> exactly as written and be at least 50 characters long. So you get 2-3 sentences that look like this:
“Product is a huge game changer for me and my family. I’ve tried some other stuff, but honestly it didn’t work as well. I’d recommend Product for anyone who has Reason.”
I’m no longer selling anything myself though. I’ve been out of this world for years.
Amazon would be absolutely thrilled if the FTC successfully cracked down on fake reviews.
Is this true? Based on my reading of the proposed rules, it would be the product owner who would be responsible, not the platform.
I don't think Amazon Basics or any of their other brands are participating in this sort of behaviour.
I could be wrong, though...
From my reading, Amazon is only responsible for whatever they knowingly participate in. If sellers and manufacturers participate in it without Amazon's knowledge, Amazon has no required enforcement.
Amazon is very much willing and able to tackle difficult problems, as repeatedly demonstrated throughout their history. Admittedly they prefer to choose which difficult problems they tackle, but still.
They have solved or attempted to solve plenty of problems just as hard as this one, even acknowledging that this is an adversarial environment. But they generally only choose to do so when the payoff to them is worth the effort. In other words, they can properly tackle it, but they wouldn’t want to.
Just a thought to clean up all the fake crap that litters the Internet.
Now with this idea you could still post anonymously it just wouldnt hold as much weight.
I'd much rather put up with the fake crap.
If participation is optional, then why would anyone participate? To be effective, it has to be mandatory in some way, be it contractually, legally, or socially.
As for an incentive in time especially if a small to mid-size portion of Internet citizens are sick of all the fakeness and start using their Internet public reputation ID then it becomes a societal push.
I think such is needed even more so for all the deepfakes that may proliferate the Internet in the next few years or more. If that becomes a huge problem of really Internet citizens figuring out what is what then maybe that starts the societal push with government offering it but not ever pushing it.
I think a lot of people would continue buying lots of stuff from Amazon. They’d just have to do their product research elsewhere.