Slashdot Mirror


Do Retailers Often Screen User Reviews?

Mechanist.tm writes "I recently purchased a NAS from a well-known online computer component shop. I have purchased several items from the website and have never had much trouble before. That was until I realized what I had bought was a terrible NAS. All the reviews on the site from users seemed very good. After a little research, it became clear that the product in question was indeed terrible. After finding the product pretty much useless for its intended purpose, I proceeded to write a review for it on the website to inform other would-be buyers. After about a week, I noticed that the review never made it up there, so I wrote another one just in case. After several attempts to leave a negative review for the product, I realized that the website was screening reviews and only posting the ones that made the products look good. All the reviews on the website are positive; I've only found one at less than 3 out of 5 stars. Is this legal? Ethically speaking, it's wrong, and it's intentionally misleading to the customer. Is there a good place to report behavior like this? How common is this among online retailers who provide user reviews?"

29 of 454 comments (clear)

  1. Their site... by Darkness404 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It is their site, they are free to publish what they feel on it. Now what -is- illegal and misleading is if you were to write a negative review and they make it be a positive review. Similar to Engadget and Monster Cable.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:Their site... by drooling-dog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      It is their site, they are free to publish what they feel on it.

      Not so sure about that. If they are misrepresenting the nature of their review site, and further misrepresenting what they're selling by censoring reviews, then that would seem to be a form of fraud. What you are suggesting is that fraud is legally OK if done on the property of the party that perpetrates it. IANAL, but this strikes me as an odd notion.

    2. Re:Their site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Not true here -- Amazon does remove negative reviews if the author requests it.

      Once, I posted a negative review of a book to Amazon.com, pointing out specific places where the book made errors. Within 24 hours, the review had disappeared, and simultaneously a "blog" post appeared on the product page where the author denounced and "rebutted" my review (which was no longer even visible.)

    3. Re:Their site... by faffod · · Score: 2, Interesting

      But then can I trust bad reviews - or are the large number of negative reviews just a byproduct of people testing the site's review process

    4. Re:Their site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      This whole "its their site, they can do what they want" thing doesnt exactly fly.

      Unless they specifically state on the site somewhere the review screening process or at the least state some reviews are filtered they are misleading the customer.

      However I doubt the US government would do anything about it.

    5. Re:Their site... by commodore64_love · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Glenn Beck has a negative review on his dust jacket? Why and from who?

      Anyway when we see reviews from Toyota, et cetera, we know those are biased commercials that have been censored by the company. We also know the reviewers are probably biased as well (getting kickbacks from the company). But when you see "What other people thought" on amazon.com then you expect non-biased opinions from people like yourself. It is that expectation that the company is abusing - it's a misleading and deceptive presentation.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    6. Re:Their site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Okay, I don't have a copy of black's law on my shelf:
          But let's summarize it as:

      1) It's intentional deception--a reasonable person would expect that a site with reviews would incorporate positive, as well as negative reviews. The removal of negative reviews suggests the absence of them.

      2) It was deception made for gain--they sold a product that they otherwise may not have sold

      You've got the definitive elements of fraud there, even though the statutes/definition vary.

    7. Re:Their site... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Nope, my review didn't contain any of the above. It did point out the author's admission that he had no personal experience in the topic that he was writing about, which probably labeled the review as a personal attack and got it removed. However, this admission was part of the book being reviewed, and therefore was fair game for comment.

    8. Re:Their site... by StarsAreAlsoFire · · Score: 3, Interesting

      IANAL, but I believe that it would only become false advertising if the company referred to the site's comment board at a later date and said 'Look! Nobody has ever given us a bad review! Everybody at least likes our product!'

      Other than that, the company can arbitrarily decide to post only reviews that have the word 'chipmunk' in them. For instance. They have to make an assertion (express or strongly implied) *in an advertisement* that is patently false for it to be false advertising. Lies by omission don't count.

      Personally I think that such 'reviews' should be prominently titled 'testimonials' or some such. It *is* disgusting. But you should never trust a review on a site where the subject under review controls the content. /shrug

    9. Re:Their site... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In the UK this sort of thing falls under the "traders tort" law.

      Traders can say things like "cheapest price in the UK!" and it is accepted that this need not be verifiably true. A reasonable person would understand that the claim is basically bollocks and is not supposed to be taken seriously.

      In the same way it is expected that a reasonable person would not expect a trader to publish negative reviews of their products in their marketing material, be it on the packaging or on their web site. If that makes the OP "unreasonable" then I'd tend to agree with it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    10. Re:Their site... by inviolet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      No one gives all the details about something they're trying to sell regardless of whether it's a piece of electronics, a car, or a home. The phrase caveat emptor has been around for at least 2000 years and probably a lot longer than that.

      I do.

      Next time you sell your old car, try it. Write down everything you know about it that is wrong or bothersome. Give it to the buyer while he's inspecting the car. You'd be surprised how good it feels to deal honorably.

      Of course I know that nobody else will give me the same treatment, but I don't care. This is how I choose to move through our world.

      --
      FATMOUSE + YOU = FATMOUSE
    11. Re:Their site... by epine · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There are many advertising practices that are either illegal or will get you into immense hot water with the enforcement agency (FDA, FCC, FTC, others). I don't know every law or rule in this field, and I don't wish to. It strikes me that blatantly creating false impressions in the mind of casual consumers violates the spirit of other laws in this field which do exist. It would be nice to find out which law, or if there is no law, to figure why this gap exists in consumer misrepresentation where others don't.

      In the case where the reviews are heavily filtered, I'd happy enough the web site referred to the reviews as "selected reviews". One additional word to indicate that the reviews are not necessarily representative of the views filed. This would not be required when reviews are removed for violating terms of service (prices, personal attacks). If the terms of service indicate that unfavourable reviews can/will be removed, why does the site offer the ability to rate a product one star? I'd be happy if the FTC supplied some clarity around this.

      Before we had consumer protection laws, we had a thriving industry in snake oil. Their ghosts achieved Valhalla on the internet. Capitalism is worthless unless it consists of informed exchanges. I don't regard caveat emptorism as a desirable economic system.

  2. The real question is... by demonlapin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Which shop?

    1. Re:The real question is... by cojsl · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Newegg did something similar a couple years back (not claiming the OP refers to Newegg, just posting my personal experience with something similar Newegg did). I posted a negative review of an item, shortly thereafter Newegg emailed me asking to resolve my complaint about the item in exchange for removing the negative review. To their credit, Newegg resolved the issue, but the net result was to artificially alter the reviews of the product.

    2. Re:The real question is... by causality · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I posted a negative review of an item, shortly thereafter Newegg emailed me asking to resolve my complaint about the item in exchange for removing the negative review. To their credit, Newegg resolved the issue, but the net result was to artificially alter the reviews of the product.

      I don't get it; they resolved the issue, so that you had nothing negative to post in the end. Let's say that instead of posting the negative review, you had contacted them of the problem to see if they would resolve it. If they hadn't, you would have posted the review; if they had, you wouldn't have, since there was no problem. The latter is what happened.

      I like the idea of leaving the negative reviews up and attaching the manufacturer's response. My reasoning is simple: shit happens. At some point there will be problems of some kind. That's a given, and a corporation's attempt to cover up this fact of life to give an illusion of perfect products that don't have even a very small percentage of defects looks pretty damned suspicious to me.

      What's important to me is when a company is willing to stand by their products and take care of its own mistakes. Do they give the customer a certain benefit of doubt, or do they treat complaining customers as though they don't believe a word they say? Do they make you otherwise jump through hoops? Do they admit fault and take responsibility and take reasonable measures to fix any problems they cause? Is it an uphill battle to get them to do the right thing? These are more important to me than how well they can censor their forums. A negative review that shows me a company bending over backwards to make things right isn't negative to me at all.

      --
      It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  3. Re:Hmm by schnikies79 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've posted more than a few negative reviews on newegg over the years and I've never had one filtered or modified. A couple of times the manufacturer replied to my review directly and offered to remedy my problem.

    --
    Gone!
  4. Re:Seriously by drinkypoo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I'm going through it with eCost right now. I guess I'll file a BBB claim, because they're not getting back to me as promised. They sold an amp with text that made it look like it did component to HDMI upconversion when it doesn't. Now they don't want to take it as a return. (I know lots of people have problems with eCost, but I've been buying from them for some time with no problems. Have even done a return before.)

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  5. Probably shouldn't blame the seller by FloydTheDroid · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The company I work for uses a third party (bazaarvoice) for our reviews so we cannot do such shenanigans. Since we don't just sell one brand we actually want the customer to know which product is the best so that they continue to buy from us. I'm sure this is how all resellers operate so what I suspect actually happened is that the review did make it to the site but the manufacturer probably had someone log in as a bunch of separate users and mark the review as objectionable so that it was taken down.

    As others have already mentioned; you can't trust reviews. My personal policy with this is ignore the 1 star - "was broken when I got it" and the 10 star - "changed my life" reviews since they don't actually have any useful information. Also, a lot of sites track user submissions so you can guess that if a person writes an unusually long review about how great their new $30 vacuum is but they've never written another review that it's probably bogus.

  6. Sidewiki by ziggy_az · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The easy answer to this is http://www.google.com/support/toolbar/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=157109 Google Sidewiki. *IF* users start using sidewiki for reviewing products on vendor sites, the vendor has no ability to moderate the reviews. Doesn't mean they won't start astroturfing the sidewiki but it would make it more expensive :)

    --
    "Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
  7. Shooting themselves in the foot by harmonise · · Score: 3, Interesting

    According to an article that I read, a mix of negative and positive reviews makes the product more attractive than only positive reviews. It seems that this retailer is probably preventing sales by not letting negative reviews through.

    --
    Cory Doctorow talking about cloud computing makes as much sense as George W Bush talking about electrical engineering.
  8. legal system by camgirlshide · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Part of the problem may be the legal system in the US. I once ran a review site where users were allowed to post comments. In one case, I was getting a ton of negative comments posted about one particular other website. I assumed (and still do) that these comments were legitimate due to the sheer volume of different users posting them and I never edited for content. Then, I got a lawsuit for defamation. Yea, I was protected legally and won, but it costs a ton of money to defend yourself against frivolous lawsuits. The best thing for most of these retailers is probably to just not allow user submitted reviews at all which is what I do now.

  9. I absolutely rely on Amazon, I just wish ... by QuatermassX · · Score: 2, Interesting
    ... that the product reviews carried over onto the UK site. I know there are all manner of reasons why this isn't quite possible, but the US site is a indispensable resource for fairly comprehensive, non-BS user reviews.

    It's a shame Amazon doesn't run Consumer Reports-esque mini-sites for popular product lines. Now you've inspired me to contribute more reviews to the UK site!

  10. So where DO you look for reviews? by Telvin_3d · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So, on a slightly related note, where DO people go for hardware reviews? In my experience sites that are not obviously corporate/bought are pretty rare on the ground. And the independent sites tend to focus on only bleeding edge gaming hardware.

    So where should I be looking for honest reviews of consumer grade routers or printers or LCDs? Everyday hardware stuff. These days I mostly go by the comments and reviews on NCIX and newegg, but a more focused approach would be nice.

    1. Re:So where DO you look for reviews? by Dun+Malg · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Amazon or Newegg, simply for sheer volume of reviews. Buy mostly from newegg because of the reasonable return policy.

      --
      If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
    2. Re:So where DO you look for reviews? by germansausage · · Score: 2, Interesting

      In Canada - try NCIX.com. Disclaimer, I don't have any relationship with them other than to buy stuff there. Reviews appear to be mostly unfiltered. You will see 1 star and 2 star reviews, even for popular products.

  11. 2 words by mysidia · · Score: 4, Interesting

    eBay feedback

    They'll nix feedback just like other sites nix reviews, if they determine that in their judgement, they think the item was bought for the sole purpose of entering negative feedback, for example.

    And an expansive, ever increasing list of reasons.

    sellers will no longer be able to leave negative/neutral feedback for buyers

    And a comprehensive feedback removal policy.

    Examples:

    But at least they are honest enough and tell you (somewhat) what they will remove.

    Most people casually browsing the site however (just as most people browsing retailers sites) have no idea that sites provide policies that allow negative ratings to be stricken from the record, and their effects on "stars" and rating score to be removed, at the whim of someone whose interests are in more sales.

  12. Which one? by YuppieScum · · Score: 2, Interesting

    .com? .co.uk? .com.au?

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
  13. The other side of negative reviews by Angst+Badger · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Recently, while shopping for a digital camera to give as a gift, I hunted through a number of online vendors, including Best Buy (mostly because I have credit with them) and NewEgg, both of whom publish negative reviews. What I discovered was that the majority of the reviews were negative on practically everything I looked at. The end result was that I bought another of the same model that I already had and knew was good. This was considerably more expensive than I had planned, but since it was a gift for someone important to me, I sucked it up and did it.

    On other occasions, looking for computer equipment, I've noticed the same phenomenon. But in this area, I'm knowledgeable enough to notice that many of the negative reviews are written by people who just don't understand the technology well enough to even operate the devices. And of course, people who have bad experiences with a product are generally more motivated to complain about it than people who have good experiences with a product are motivated to praise it.

    While it's certainly unethical for a vendor to censor reviews -- without at least prominently announcing that they are censoring them -- I have to question the value of reviews by the general public in the first place.

    --
    Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
  14. Re:And who made the product? by Kuad · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I bought the same and also posted a negative review on Overclockers that never appeared. I eventually wrote the Icybox off as a hard-learned lesson and just leave a PC on all the time instead.