Slashdot Mirror
PR Firm Settles With FTC On Fake Game Reviews
eldavojohn writes "So, you pay a PR firm like Reverb to generate some positive buzz for your new mobile game, and what do they do? Hire employees to post fake glowing reviews of your game wherever it's being distributed. The FTC says that's not okay due to regulations enacted last year requiring that paid reviews disclose they are paid reviews. Originally, the fear was that this regulation would target the small-time blogger, but this news of Reverb settling with the FTC over fake game reviews shows that the FTC is also targeting big PR firms. They said, 'We hope that this case will show advertisers that they have to be transparent in their practices and help guide other ad agencies.' The article says fake reviews like those alleged in the complaint (PDF) are pretty much the norm on iTunes. Reverb denies that this settlement is any acknowledgment of wrongdoing; rather, just a timesaver over a costly court battle. Will the FTC continue to make examples of big PR firms? Wait and see."
These fake reviews are common for businesses as well. Take a look at restaurants on Yelp sometime; many "boost" their review status by posting fakes. How is the FTC actually able to deduce which are from a firm and which are legit anyway?
idioelectric - Electric per se, or containing electricity in its natural state.
Why should I pay someone to post fake reviews when I can create false accounts and post fake reviews all by myself for free? Unless there is some foolproof method of positively establishing the identity of the poster, these reviews should be considered crap anyway.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Surely there are businesses out there that will supply any number of comments on anything you want. It can't be that hard to fool the comment-receiving sites, and with a little software cleverness you could probably automate syntax variation etc. -- you could probably mine existing comment sites for expressions, tropes, even common spelling errors.
I'm suprised any example of it's actions were not in the complaint or article. Kinda wish I was able to find out who paid for good reviews.
--Accept it, I'm a programmer and don't use spellcheck. As long as I spell things wrong consistently my programs work fi
Video game reviewing is probably one of the least credible forms of "journalism" out there. Back in the day it was magazine editors that were getting rewards for pushing reviews in perhaps more positive directions than they needed to be. Then it was game reviewing websites. Now it's a swarm of goobers who post "user" reviews to sites.
I'm fairly confident in saying that video game reviews, for the most part, are useless (or perhaps to be taken for entertainment purposes only).
crazy dynamite monkey
On the bright side, they've added the "believable" tomatometer to itunes movie reviews,
but it's pretty obvious from the vacuous generic positive platitudes that many of the "user"
reviews are bought and paid for.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
"EA Sports doesn't want you to know that the characters in their so-called 'wrestling' games are really just actors, spitting chicken blood and stomping their feet to simulate impacts.
If they really cared about gamers, why would they pull this trick on innocent people?
Call EA Sports and tell them: no more jumping off of ladders onto balsa wood tables.
I'm THQ UFC Undisputed, and I approve this message."
My debut novel AMITY now available: http://jeremydbrooks.c
Now if they only started actually enforcing the payola laws.
Originally, the fear was that this regulation would target the small-time blogger, but this news of Reverb settling with the FTC over fake game reviews shows that the FTC is also targeting big PR firms.
"Also" targeting big PR firms? Where has the FTC been "targetting" "small-time" bloggers?
Something tells me the FTC has zero interest in enforcement for individuals, unless they're misleading a LOT of people.
Please help metamoderate.
I mean surely after 10 or 20 reincarnations of the same useless fart app gets released, it will be obvious that Apple's marketplace is too bloated to be useful...
Yeah, instead they'll just make their fart apps from Android.
droidFart is THE premiere fart application for the Android operating system.
Or if you are more into the Bieber craze you can get the Bieber Fart App.
I mean how hard could it be to write an app that detected fake app reviews
Probably as hard as it is to detect fake email...
I would make it illegal to settle a lawsuit without admitting wrongdoing.
If you're innocent, then it's wrong for the plaintiff to get a dime from you. And if you're liable, then the results of discovery should be available to any other would-be plaintiff.
Settlements basically set up a shakedown system.
Are these bloggers typical slashdot bloggers?
Duke Nukem Forever is the wonderfulest game ever gone and played. It is more better than the other one. I dont no of any gooder game available for the xbox windows. It wood only gets betterer if they cud have included Natalie Portman as a playable character.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
Since American corporations now have pay for votes, Fox News, which is a self-described news organization and which contains vast amounts of astroturfing of current events, should be treated as false advertising as well.
What is a review that isn't "fake" or paid for? Where do you find such a thing? Certainly not on the Internet.
There are two reasons for anyone to write something: they personally feel so strongly that they have to tell other people and they are getting paid to do it. The former is pretty much restricted to people with negative comments. So I guess that means any review that is positive is paid for.
Similarly, negative reviews about your competition are an extremely powerful tool if you assume that people are still reading fake, misleading reviews about anything. So that means a good portion of the negative reviews can be assumed to be put their by people trying to make their competition look bad.
So why would anyone believe a review on the Internet? Near as I can tell they are all fake or paid for.
I mean, does InfoWorld pay snydeq to do anything else besides astroturf daily on Slashdot?
Will the FTC continue to make examples of big PR firms?
It is the modus operandi of the FTC to go after big firms and hope that the smaller guys will play along. They suggest that if you notice a small business not obeying rules, you should report them to the BBB, report them to local authorities, or sue them yourself. Presumably they don't have enough resources to chase everyone, but for whatever reason, if you are a small blog, you have nothing to worry about from the FTC.
Qxe4
Newegg, Amazon, any online reseller has reviews for each item where in some cases I'd guess 50% of them are fake.
At least on Amazon you can reply to a comment and challenge the person's authenticity.
I wouldn't see a reason why game reviews would be any different.
We've all seen obviously fake reviews, on all our favorite internet stores. However, you've probably also seen very nice, balanced user reviews (I sometimes leave these on Amazon whether I liked or disliked whatever it is... I don't think I've ever reviewed a game on there, though).
So how hard would it be to pay people to write reviews that aren't so obviously fake? Provide your fake reviewers with mostly positive points about the game - not "It's great! I can't stop playing it!!!" nonsense, but actual aspects of interesting gameplay or whatever (assuming your game has this). Also provide them with a few negative points. Ask the programmers, I don't expect the marketing droids to be able to figure this out for themselves. Just ask the programmer for a few honest negative points that they wish they'd had time to improve before release. They don't have to heavily criticize huge aspects of the game, just a few small points.
Then the marketing droids can come up with several similarly-worded reviews, different enough to not obviously be the same, to post on various sites. It'll be an overall positive review, but it will seem balanced from the negative points (and the lack of mindless praise), meaning people will be more likely to trust it. Meaning you'll influence people a lot more effectively. If certain market segments are actually influenced by the mindless positive reviews, then post those too I guess if it makes you money.
Well, I don't know why I'm giving the marketing department ideas. I'm not saying I would approve of such measures, I'm just saying that if they had given it even a little bit of fault they could be a whole lot more effective, and those of us who recognize the fake reviews might not be able to anymore.
Video game reviewing is probably one of the least credible forms of "journalism" out there. Back in the day it was magazine editors that were getting rewards for pushing reviews in perhaps more positive directions than they needed to be..... http://globetv.co.uk/