I hope no one tells the FTC about paid Amazon reviews, they'd probably have a heart attack.
The problem I found was that all the games revewied were linked in an affilaite sales agreement.
This created a 'bubble' of games that many reviewers reviewed.
Searching further, I found that board games are so loved by millions that you can find quality reviews from peoplw who buy many games. You can even find views of the full contents of games so you can make a further informed decision.
None of this was on social media, just a good old fashioned web search.
BGG does have a very clear bias against traditional games (see Clue, Monopoly, etcetera), due to it's roots, but that's changed a bit as board games have become big again.
It isn't saying that they can't do that, just that if they do they most disclose that they received compensation.
Sounds immanently reasonable to me.
People who don't give glowing reviews don't get contacted the next time around.
In many of these niche communities I suspect it is far more about the perceived clout (Oh, hey, I get to play it months before you do!) than the actual financial incentives.
Sure.
But if you don't reveal that they've given payment in the form of a free game, you are giving a dishonest review. Free stuff is payment. And everyone knows it is payment - Free meals and other benefits at a job are advertised to entice you. It might not be taxed, but is definitely part of your pay package.
I'm pretty sure the FTC knows about the Amazon reviews - they've taken action against some of them. They may or may not have the budget to go after more and may or may not have the power to go after all of them.