Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Lawsuit Aims To Kill Fake Reviews (theguardian.com)
Mark Wilson writes with a story at Beta News (relying on this report at The Guardian) that Amazon is suing more than 1,000 fake reviewers for their misleading, paid-for reviews:
The ability to read reviews of products before making a purchase is one of the great advantages of online shopping. But how do you know that what you're reading is a genuine review and not just glowing praise planted by the seller or manufacturer? Fake reviews are a serious problem, and Amazon is trying to do something about it. The retail giant has filed a lawsuit against 1,114 individuals for writing 'false, misleading, and inauthentic' reviews. Amazon says that the fakers are tarnishing its reputation, and the attempt to clean up the site is something that will be welcomed by consumers.
From the Guardian's version of the story: Amazon said there had been misleading five-star reviews and comments about products, such as: “This has lit up my life” about a USB cable. A bogus comment said “definitely buying more I was impressed with how bright the lights on the cable are”, while another reviewer gave a product top marks and added the comment “cool charger”.
Amazon is not suing Fiverr, a startup that raised $30m from investors last year, as the company says in its terms and conditions that advertising for services such as writing bogus reviews is banned.
> "false, misleading, and inauthentic"
Like, advertising?
And before you say, "yes but we know advertising is advertising, and this is masquerading as something else"...
Consider the reality of "Native Advertising", the advertising industry's response to ad blocking: http://bit.ly/native_adverts
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Only if tou make stupid reviews that look like thin attempts at fullfilling a review quota.
They're not suing them... yet. More than likely they're trying to win smaller cases against defendants with less legal strength, to set a precedence for when they go after bigger players.
Better known as 318230.
I want to know what they're going to do with the funny reviews like the steering wheel table, three moon t-shirt, etc... Some of those are too funny to let die. Maybe we need to scrape them and host them elsewhere just to make sure they don't go away. Some of them are damned funny. I've wasted hours reading some of them.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
What about reviews written tongue in cheek for humor? Amazon seems to actually embrace them:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/featu...
How is the USB cable review different than the ones in the link above?
Better known as 318230.
A+++++
They are THE MOST accurate reviews I have ever seen or heard of! AAA++++++++++++++ accuracy! Would read them again!!!!!!! Top value!
1. Generally, I only put stock into the ones from verified purchasers - mainly because of all the people trying to game the reviews.
2. There is a growing, serious problem with reviews submitted people who've been given a product discount and "asked" to write a review. Interestingly, they apparently are required to state that fact in the review itself, which makes it easier for me to flag all such reviews as "unhelpful".
3. Amazon has its own ludicrous program for sending free products to people expressly so they'll review the items ("Vine", I think). These are also well worthy of being flagged as unhelpful, which I try to do whenever I'm exposed to them. Come on, Amazon... I only want to hear the experiences of people who purchased the product because they needed / wanted it. I couldn't care less about the opinion of someone who received the product just because they're considered a good reviewer in general - what a dumb concept!
#DeleteChrome
we should have the legal right to kill bezos in self defense then. fuck amazon. time for a corporate death penalty.
When there's a product that ships from China and has only a single, 5-star, over-the-top, broken-English verified-buyer purchase, I know to avoid the product. And all the vendor's products have similar ones... I guess we'll lose that filter.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Wait a minute, you mean the $25,000 ethernet cable I bought based
on the reviewer's statements about better sex might be bogus?!
CAP == 'incest' == I kid you not!
You know, sometimes I think it's better to write a comment around
the CAP than around the actual article...
Far more serious are real reviewers, who are happy to give a 4 or 5 star review to anything they get for free:
http://www.amazon.com/forum/am...
Amazon explicitly allows this, which I guess is better than driving it underground, but does nothing to account for this heavy reviewer bias:
"if you offer a free or discounted product in exchange for a review, you must clearly state that you welcome both positive and negative feedback. If you receive a free or discounted product in exchange for your review, you must clearly and conspicuously disclose that fact."
https://www.amazon.com/gp/help...
I've seen MANY products whose 4.5 star averages are purely because the seller sends out tons of free samples in exchange for positive reviews. Meanwhile, products that are considerably less expensive but don't bribe their customers unfortunately get less prominently featured in search results because their average rating, sales counts, and review numbers are so much lower.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
This isn't a situation where they're randomly suing reviewers. Amazon is suing people who (a) posted an offer to submit a fake Amazon review in exchange for payment, (b) received payment, and (c) posted a fake review.
Published reviews should be restricted to people who have actually purchased the product from Amazon, especially with items that cost a significant amount. That would dramatically cut down fraud. As it is, Amazon reviews tend to be most effective when there are a few hundred or thousands for a product and the product is in the $50+ range. In those cases, it can be highly educational to read through the reviews because people often highlight product flaws and provide advice and workarounds for common problems.
as long as they don't stop bad reviews / sue people for posting bad reviews
They should also do something about the fake 1-star reviews, the ones that tarnish a products or person's reputation. It is rampant in the e-book community, as are the 5-star reviews.
If you review a product on Amazon, that will follow you until the day you die (ok, not based on experience). Not just at Amazon but all over the web.
Also, Amazon, how about fixing your search results. More than once, I've been caught by results that don't meet the search criteria. For example, a 3.5 inch drive mixed in with the results for a search that specifically states 2.5 inch. I know I should read the description completely but, for some reason, I'm biased to expect the returns to match the criteria.
They must mean me. I always give overly enthusiastic comments and answers when Amazon bugs me to do so, in the hope that they won't ask me again.
I worry about losing the funny ones. Like these.
Some of this stuff is pure gold, and I think it actually helps Amazon overall, as it gets people to go to the site, and hang around on it, and think about it.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Fiverr must not be trying too hard to take down these services, because a search for "amazon" turns up a phony reviewer as the first hit:
https://www.fiverr.com/abigail...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
they do, however, regulate paid endorsements. See the difference?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
More entertaining ones:
50 shades of Grey (love or hate the book, the reviews are hilarious)
That funny plastic banana slicing thing (these crack me up every time).
Silver food spray (after Mad Max of course)
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I got tired of receiving follow-up communications requesting reviews after I buy something. It seems to happen almost half the time now.
This is where to report these sellers: http://www.amazon.com/gp/help/...
I had no idea they were breaking the rules by doing this.
I was for quite a while a high rated Amazon review (I'm still on the "top reviewer" list) and I get a LOT of offers from companies to send me products in return for a review. It's interesting how that works ... and note up front that I do very little of this any longer, primarily because accepting such offers harms my reputation as a reviewer no matter how honest my reviews were.
I got some really laughable emails saying things like, "We'll send you a product in exchange for a five-star review." Nope. No thanks. Or, "please post review with 3 pcs. pictures." Thanks but I do reviews my own way.
In responding to some of the offers, when I state that I say what I think and write reviews on behalf of the prospective buyer, not the seller, a lot of the free offers disappeared. But some remained, and when I received a bad product and wrote an unfavorable review, some manufacturers demanded that I remove it (not going to happen, if you sell a bad product, live with it).
But it got really distasteful so now I generally review things that I bought on my own.
However, I can easily see how the system has become very corrupt, and so I just don't take free products from manufacturers any longer.
Not sure how many of these are legit, but they are funny as hell, since they replace sugar with some ingredient that leads to intestinal issues.
http://www.amazon.com/Haribo-Sugar-Free-Gummy-Bears/product-reviews/B008JELLCA/
In those cases, it can be highly educational to read through the reviews because people often highlight product flaws and provide advice and workarounds for common problems.
Workarounds for common problems? That will get your review edited or cancelled real quick. With a lot of nasty mails reminding you what a review is for (i.e. for helping the buyer decide whether to buy the product or not, rather than helping him use it once he has it). Has happened to me a couple of times after reviewing some more tricky to use items (electronic gear for Raspberry Pi). I figured that re-assuring the user that the product can be used despite some flaws would put it back in place. At least *I* as a buyer would be grateful to have that kind of info when deciding whether to buy or not. But apparently Amazon moderators see this differently...
Since then I basically stopped reviewing. Indeed, why take the time to write a thoughtful and helpful review, and then see it butchered a week after, and removed entirely two weeks later?
Say no to software patents.
Automatically marking a review "unhelpful" when it is well written, thorough, and EXPLICITLY STATES that it's a review of a product that was received for free (and down-voting it for that reason alone) is just plain stupid, period.
What a dumb concept! You'd rather hear from idiot Joe, the axe-to-grind former employee of the company that makes the product and is now on a mission disparage the company with negative reviews, or Sally the underhanded paid reviewer who writes the review for a payment having never even laid eyes on the product and doesn't disclose it at all, or Bill the company's marketing guy who just posts positive reviews of his own products to generate buzz but acts as though he's a normal customer, or Steve the e-commerce moron who writes a 1-star review discussing how bad UPS messed up the box in shipment and doesn't even mention the product itself, or Nancy the mostly-illiterate, who writes incomprehensible gobbledygook that might be in some way related to the product, but rates it 1-star because it's "#1, the best."
Quite frankly, I'd MUCH MUCH rather have reviews from people who can actually write, are skilled at writing comprehensive and thorough reviews (as determined by the community of shoppers), and are honest about both their motivations and their product experiences. Essentially every single tech site and publication and YouTube channel and professional reviewer gets some products for free and/or is sponsored by manufacturers, and they don't always review things positively or benchmark things generously either. When I know who is writing the review and why, I can take that information into account along with the review's actual content and come to my own conclusion. This is especially helpful when it's a newly introduced product and there aren't any other reviews of it yet. I don't want to be the only guinea pig, especially if it's moderately to high priced.
So please stop trying to down-rank those reviews on "principle" and make me wade through the cesspool of idiocy and nearly unreadable reviews mentioned above just to get to the ones that, you know, tell me why I might or might not be interested in the product.. I'm smart enough to decide for myself if I trust the reviewer to be impartial or if the information in it is valuable without someone making a blanket judgement based only on one factor that they're fully honest and up-front about!
I only downvote reviews that actually suck (there are a lot of them), or that are obviously fake (for example one user reviewing all the products from just one company, often on the same day, and with no other reviews, or several reviewers with very suspiciously similar reviews all posted around the same time and often being the only review they've written).
The problem wasn't with writing a bad review of a bad product. The problem came when I received a really good product, that deserved a good review. I would look like a shill even though I was telling the truth.
For instance, I reviewed practically the whole Brainwavz audio product line. They make very good products. I'm an electrical engineer who did professional audio work for quite a few years, and I think I know what I'm talking about. So I gave Brainwavz a lot of good reviews because that was the honest truth. But I was accused of shilling and selling out, even though I was careful to point out product shortcomings as well as merits.
Did I really need over a dozen free headsets? Hardly. (And no, I won't sell them off because that's very unethical.) I just wanted to give genuine feedback in the hopes that it would be useful.
But I'm done. As the commenter above noted, it's a scummy world out there, and for every company that truly wants an honest review (Brainwavz was really good about it, they are very ethical), there's a dozen that don't.
I'm all for them deleting fake reviews, especially those that are written in exchange for money. But they had better leave these comments alone!
Based in: United States
Speaks: English
profile picture: blonde haired blue eyed white girl
Profile text:
"Hi
This is Abigail tess. I am very much kin to work with you about and related with any amazon work. I'm very professional and permanent worker.I can do amazon product ranking anywhere you want, I can give you 50+ reviews on a same product.
I am waiting for serving best service."
Fiverr is a cesspool of corrupt third world trash.
Not sure what your beef is. Sounds like a typical American high school graduate.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
You are paid, in the form of lower prices as they slowly weed out the bad products which waste resources systemically. You're also paid in the form of better satisfaction because the reviews help you find good products. You get a good product more often and you waste less resources on returns. It's entirely in your interest as a consumer to have a review system, and more importantly an honest review system.
Also BIC Cristal For Her!
I hope Amazon doesn't shut down the reviews for the The Mountain Three Wolf Moon Short Sleeve Tee
It is pure Internet Gold!
Left MS Windows for Linux Mint and never looked back!
Vote for Bernie in 2016!
I've only read the banana ones. I'll be reading the others this evening. Thanks. :D
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
He's not just an actor, he's a golden-tongued living deity with powers far beyond the mere superhuman. Proof abounds in these Amazon reviews of his finest work: http://www.amazon.com/Very-Bes...
Just put a little popup next to the company name stating "In the past this company has paid reviewers for positive reviews. The veracity of the reviews below cannot be confirmed or denied."
Besides the scarlet letter on the offending company, I'm guessing this will have the side-effect of scaring away any potential legitimate reviewer who would not want to be mistaken for a shill. The company learns a valuable lesson in honesty which will be forgotten in 8 seconds.
The Russians have won. They have made the world a cesspool of distrust, greed, fear and hate.
Thanks for the info. I have often received emails from vendors that demand that I give them a five star rating. The demands are couched in happy rainbow unicorn wording, but they are demands nonetheless. I refuse to comply, and have been sorely tempted to retaliate with ratings that echo how I despise their demands. But now I will probably use your useful link and report these directly. Thank you, sir!
A dingo ate my sig...
I did reviews, blog comments, forum posts, and such for extra cash for almost a year.
There are companies that even pay forum commenters to try and argue a specific point. They even give tips how to get a poster with an opposing view that argues with you banned, with tricks to use to make the debate go from heated argument to using certain arguing tricks to incite the opponent into raging and cursing/name calling/etc, then get them suspended or banned thus making you look the victor in spreading a company or organization's propaganda even if you don't believe it yourself.
For example you may hate Jews, or Scientology, or Coke, or Apple, Microsoft, lists go on and on and on...
But even though you hate them, you can get paid to post pro-propaganda in a real non bot post and they give you talking points on stirring up controversy and making the thread popular and arguing with those against your side.
Toward end, when I moved from fake reviews and 5 stars, and did paid forum posts I was arguing with posters that I personally agreed with but to get paid had to "act" like I truly believed the shit I wrote. And I personally got 3 people suspended and banned by inciting them into raging. I decided it wasn't fun anymore spreading bullshit and getting paid to practically troll.
Forums they target are from news comment sections to kooky conspiracy forums like abovetopsecret.com, Slashdot, Reddit, Somethingaweful (once you've proven to be a good poster the company will buy your membership into some forums), list goes on and on.
And using Tor to create multiple accounts for creating a virtual opponent so you actually debate yourself, but just enough to bait others into it, or you wind up winning your "fake debate" with yourself.
Here's just a few examples of companies that act as the "middle man" to the corporations, organizations, and charities that pay forum posters to push specific agendas. And yes Jewish lobby is a gigantic user of these services to attack and try to get any antisemitism banned or thread locked, and political parties,SJW groups, to brand loyalty and etc. It would blow your mind how many posters on your favorite sites are actually paid shills while they may argue with you, they honestly agree with you, they get paid to incite, debate, and spread viewpoints.
http://www.paidforumposting.co...
http://kickstartyourforums.com...
http://thecashchat.com/forum/
http://www.mylot.com/
http://www.postloop.com/
http://talk4dollar.com/
That's just a tiny tiny sample. But they are middle-men that way the true companies, organizations, charities have deniability of using paid shills.
Why is it unethical to sell off the headsets? I'd say it's unethical to keep them. If you sell them, fewer resources will have to be put to use making new ones.
So, let's see, now if post a review on Amazon, they might sue me? I knew it was pointless to post those reviews, but now it's clearly stupid, as well.
I always knew you were a paid shill, Mr. Coward! Now you've outed yourself.
Some products are just begging for fake reviews... hat tip Badonkadonk land cruiser :-)
Human Rights, Article 12: Freedom from Interference with Privacy, Family, Home and Correspondence
Published reviews should be restricted to people who have actually purchased the product from Amazon, especially with items that cost a significant amount.
Restricting reviews to those who've bought the item is a terrible idea. I don't need to buy colloidal silver "wellness" drops to know the product is expensive snake oil. I don't need to buy Monster HDMI cables to know they're massively overpriced compared to functionally identical generic cables. Amazon sells thousands of products which are not fit for purpose, expensive, do nothing and / or in certain cases are dangerous. Why shouldn't I be able to say as much in a review as a warning to others? Why should I be expected to buy this shit in order to criticize it? The only beneficiaries from this would the people peddling bullshit.
And more mundanely maybe I just own the product in question simply want to review it online.
It's a terrible idea to block legitimate reviews regardless of someone owning a product or not. I'm sure it might stop shill reviews (much like lopping one's head off is a cure for headlice), but it doesn't make it a reasonable or good idea. If Amazon want to stop shills then they need to proactively monitor for suspicious activity and start weighting reviews and products based on the trustworthiness of the reviews, and yes if they've bought it.
Presumably they're only concerned with the genuinely misleading ones. Nobody is going to see those reviews and not realise it's a joke. It has the side effect of attracting more people but it's doing so in an honest way and doesn't damage Amazon's brand.
The fraudulent views do damage the brand. People can't tell whether to take these seriously or not.
See, normally I ignore your posts because they reek of racist stupidity.
This one skipped that initially so I made it as far as
nano chip chemtrails
Congratulations. You've killed your credibility even more thoroughly than when I was discounting it as a racist rant.
I was a reviewer for Newegg for a while where they would give you an item and you had 2 weeks to post a review on the item you received. That lasted for about 6 months before I stopped receiving assignments. I was always honest with my reviews, most of the items I received were useful and good in quality, though there were a few that did not work properly or had some inherent issues with their design. It's an easy problem to fix though. If that person didn't purchase the item from Amazon, they shouldn't be allowed to post a review. I think it should go the same way for other sites as well. If they don't do this, then the weight of the review from a non "Verified Purchaser" should be zero. It should have no effect on the review score and should show up lower in the results.
Have you ever fallen asleep at the keybhanusdiog?
The comical thing with this post is that you may be using the techniques you describe to kickstart a conversation in which you're replying to yourself and/or setting up a disinformation campaign.
Or you may be legit.
The two anonymous replies already received however.. they're fitting straight into the 'paid for' bracket.
I shall watch this thread with interest :)
And the one about the $10,000 flat screen TV.
"Contrarily the lookaside buffer might not be the panacea... "
What I've determined whenever I look at the reviews of a product on Amazon (or any site) is that no product produced actually works. Every product has the people that received DOA items, or they broke on first use.
Though my favorite is the five-star review I saw for "Box was damaged so I returned it unopened, but what I saw of it, it looked okay"
Real reviews from people who didn't buy a product from Amazon are possible. I have done some myself, of products that I bought when another supplier had a better price or Amazon was out of stock.
That is a very flimsy argument in support of selling them. He said he didn't want to be a shill or look like one, so selling off the freely received reviewed products for a chunk of their retail value would effectively be no different from the company giving him money up front.