Slashdot Mirror
Amazon Makes Good On Its Promise To Delete 'Incentivized' Reviews (techcrunch.com)
Amazon is making good on its promise to ban "incentivized" reviews from its website, according to a new analysis of over 32,000 products and around 65 million reviews. From a TechCrunch article: The ban was meant to address the growing problem of less trustworthy reviews that had been plaguing the retailer's site, leading to products with higher ratings than they would otherwise deserve. Incentivized reviews are those where the vendor offers free or discounted products to reviewers, in exchange for recipients writing their "honest opinion" of the item in an Amazon review. However, data has shown that these reviewers tend to write more positive reviews overall, with products earning an average of 4.74 stars out of five, compared with an average rating of 4.36 for non-incentivized reviews. Over time, these reviews proliferated on Amazon, and damaged consumers' trust in the review system as a whole. And that can impact consumers' purchase decisions.
Because, presumably, they expect everyone to preview their submission before hitting submit, and verify that what they are writing doesnâ(TM)t contain any such characters.
There are only a few grievances I have with this site, and its lack of friendliness to utf8 is one of them.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
IMO, this is a bad policy, plain and simple.
The reality of the matter is that incentivized reviews aren't really a problem, and actually prevent much worse problems. Incentivized reviews (where people get, for example, a free product in exchange for a review) serve a crucial purpose in the industry—allowing products from new publishers, new manufacturers, etc. to get reviewed by someone competent early on so that people will actually consider that product. (Most people won't seriously look at a product that has no reviews.) By banning them, Amazon is basically saying that new publishers, new authors, new manufacturers, etc. need not bother to sell there.
Worse, a ban on incentivized reviews significantly increases the pressure on small businesses to use truly unethical means of getting reviews, such as hiring companies that pay people to buy the product and write fake reviews. Lots of seriously bad products invariably have dozens of obviously fake five-star reviews, and that abuse of the system makes it even harder for legitimate businesses to get their foot in the door.
The only way this decision doesn't represent an absolute abandonment of Amazon's duty to protect consumers from outright fraud is if they also make participation in the Vine program free and available to anyone who asks, whether they are Amazon vendors or not. Otherwise, this ban just encourages outright fraud by eliminating the one legitimate means that most small businesses have for getting reviews.
And the policy isn't just anti-small-business. It's also anti-consumer. The notion that the difference between 4.74 stars and 4.36 is meaningful is laughable. Star ratings are completely meaningless in aggregate (at least without a standard deviation), because a product could have three five-star ratings that says "This product is great" and a one-star rating that says "This product burned down my house", and in aggregate, that product would have a 4.5-star rating. Everybody who actually buys products understands the fallacy of comparing star ratings, and instead reads the highest-rated high, low, and average reviews to see what they actually say about the product.
Moreover, anybody serious about buying the right product also does keyword searches looking for aspects of the product that interest or concern them. For this reason, consumers are served best by having as many reviews as possible, paid or otherwise, because (with the exception of very bad products) each review is likely to provide information about some aspect of the product that no other review provides. So deleting incentivized reviews is not just anti-small-business. It's also anti-consumer, because it reduces the amount of information available to consumers about products that they are considering buying.
I'm absolutely blown away at the absolute cluelessness of this decision. It is as though their management never actually bought a product on their own website, never sold any product anywhere, and couldn't be bothered to ask consumers or sellers what they thought. The resulting decision is utterly naïve.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
They should also do something about "angry reviews" from people that have requested to be removed from marketing email, but are receiving it anyway through "marketplace.amazon.com", mostly badgering for reviews. Amazon refuses to stop those emails, so every time I receive one, I leave a one-star review for the product. I used to say that it was because they spammed me, and it didn't really reflect on the quality of the review, but then Amazon started deleting any review that mentioned spamming, so now I make up something about the quality of the product instead. This pollutes the review process and diminishes its usefulness, but at least I get my revenge. The obvious way for Amazon to fix this problem would be to stop spamming people that have requested to be removed from their marketing email list.
They're easily spotted.
The easily spotted ones are easily spotted. Many others are not. My daughter makes money on Fiverr writing fake reviews. She is an A-student, and writes impeccable English. Many of her reviews are flagged as "most useful" by Amazon customers, and she uses that fact to promote her services. There is no indication that her reviews are fake or incentivized, so I don't see how Amazon is going to remove them.
Amazon could solve this issue by only allowing reviews from people who have actually purchased the product on Amazon.
Nope. My daughter writes fake reviews, and she typically charges $20+"price of product" if they want a "verified" review. For more expensive items, she will sometimes charge the difference between what the product costs on Amazon, and what she can resell the NIB product for on eBay or Craigslist, and then she has Amazon drop-ship directly to the secondary customer.
Requiring all reviewers to be verified buyers may help somewhat, but it would be only a partial fix by raising the cost of the fake reviews.
From what I've heard, fake reviewers often ARE verified purchasers.
Correct.
They work out deals to buy the products, then return them to the seller for a refund.
It is even easier than that. When my daughter writes fake reviews, she pre-sells the product on eBay or Craigslist, then buys it from Amazon and has Amazon drop ship it directly to the secondary customer. Then the seller reimburses her for the price difference. So the review is from a "verified" customer, when if fact she has never actually seen the product. Since she is a Prime member, the shipping is free, and that cost advantage means she sometimes directly makes money on the eBay transaction.
Does anything about her doing this bother you, from a moral or ethical standpoint?
On one hand it seems harmless, but if you, yes you were to spend your hard-earned money on a crappy product and then found that you'd based your buying decision on secretly-incentivized reviews, would you not feel that you'd been mislead, lied to, or deceived?
If my son were to do this, I couldn't help but feel that he wasn't the person I'd hoped he be.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
Does anything about her doing this bother you, from a moral or ethical standpoint?
Yes, but she is a 19 year old adult, so she makes her own decisions. I can think of about a zillion other things she could be doing that would bother me more.
Here's your bottom line up front: Amazon doesn't care about the quality of reviews. Period. Amazon cares about control of the process.
Here's how I know this:
I have been an amazon Vine member since 2009. At the time I was invited to start receiving "free" (no longer are they free: for the last two years, every item is assigned a "fair market value" (FMV) for tax purposes that results in an an annual 1099 for the IRS; generally the FMV is about 1/3 of the sticker price) items, I had written less than 20 reviews of things bought from amazon since 1997.
From 2012 until early last month, I also accepted and reviewed items provided directly to me through amazon vendors. Some where shipped directly to me, and some where provided through amazon via a vendor-supplied claim code that would result in an "amazon verified purchase badge. At the "high water mark" of my reviewing activity, I was ranked in the low two digits of amazon's "Top Reviewer Ranking" list.
The above represents three categories of reviews:
(1) Amazon supplied through Vine (which carries a giant green "Vine Customer Review of Free Product" banner)
(2) Vendor-supplied direct (and therefore, no "verified purchase" label)
(3) Vendor-supplied via claim code (and therefore labeled as "verified purchase"
(4) Things I bought from amazon with my own money (the "true" amazon verified purchases)
(5) Things I bought someplace else and reviewed on amazon.
For (1): Amazon generates the disclaimer. .I simply stated that fact of receiving the item for reviewing, in order to comply with both Amazon and an FTC requirement.
For (2) and (3): I provided the disclaimer at the end of the review. I didn't make a rhetorical attempt to convince you that I had provided an "honest evaluation...blah blah blah.."
I had no incentive to inflate the ratings on any of these products categories.
The stream of Vine items was not dependent on me offering a high rating, and I have 1-starred many big ticket items. Since 2009, the Vine program has sent me over 300 items..from Post-It notes and advance reviewer copies of books to high-end A/V equipment carrying 4-figure price tags; overall average value is about $65 for ALL products...but there is nearly a $1600 range between the most and least expensive items). I'll tell you more about why the scoring or strength of content was irrelevant to amazon in a second.
For vendor-provided items, the majority of these were Chinese-manufactured smalls (Bluetooth speakers, LED flashlights, Lightning cables, USB cables, kitchen items, RC vehicles, dashcams, GoPro knockoffs... although a few others popped into the "shiny" zone, and came from brand names you would recognize immediately), but I also had no incentive to inflate the scoring of these products either. Typically, the vendors had not read any of my reviews, they simply had my email address (and there is clearly an active network of vendors exchanging big lists of such email addresses). Before accepting an item I told each vendor that I would be disclosing the receipt of the item, and that the rating and review would be based directly on my user experience. The email associated with my amazon account received an average of about 35 such offers every day. Since amazon ended "incentived" reviews. I still get 15-20 offers daily, even though they are deleted without reading.
And for stuff I bought myself (on Amazon or elsewhere: just as with Vine and vendor-provided products: I reported my user experience. My overall average product rating was slightly above 4 for over 1600 reviews written since 2009..
In order, here's what amazon has done since October:
-Told ALL reviewers that they could no longer review items received for free from vendors.
-Deleted the entire contents of reviewers that amazon's magical systems decided were engaging in manipulative behavior. Sometimes this removed the reviews of obvious shill or dishonest reviewers...and sometimes this threw out the baby with the bathwater as honest