Slashdot Mirror


Man Jailed For Hundreds of Fake TripAdvisor Reviews (tripadvisor.com)

An Italian man was sentenced to nine months in jail for selling fake reviews on TripAdvisor to several hundred businesses. He'll also be fined 8,000 euros (about $9,300).

TripAdvisor had threatened businesses with a red badge icon warning travelers thatreviews had been manipulated, after which "several businesses were willing to share information to support TripAdvisor's investigations." From TripAdvisor's Insights blog:
Back in 2015, our dedicated team of fraud investigators identified a new illegal business in Italy called PromoSalento that was offering to write fake reviews for hospitality businesses... PromoSalento attempted to avoid our scrutiny by regularly changing their usernames and email addresses, but our fraud detection processes use a suite of advanced technologies to evaluate hundreds of review attributes such as IP addresses, browser types and even the screen resolution of a reviewer's device. Based on that analysis, we were able to see a trail of digital and behavioral 'breadcrumbs' that led our team straight back to PromoSalento....

Writing fake reviews on TripAdvisor has always been a violation of the law in many jurisdictions, for instance falling under the EU Unfair Commercial Practices Directive, as well as national laws relating to consumer protection, fraud and false advertising. However, this is the first time we have seen the laws being enforced to the point of securing a criminal conviction.

"As many as 16 percent of online reviews are fake, according to research by the European Parliament," reports CBS News. Yet they add that when it comes to accountability and consumer safety, many Americans believe online reviews are more effective than government oversight.

11 of 59 comments (clear)

  1. not a contradiction by ooloorie · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "As many as 16 percent of online reviews are fake, according to research by the European Parliament," reports CBS News. Yet they add that when it comes to accountability and consumer safety, many Americans believe online reviews are more effective than government oversight.

    That's not a contradiction because:

    (1) people are pretty good at spotting fake reviews

    (2) government oversight is often nearly useless and at times simply corrupt

  2. Reviews, govt are for very different purposes by raymorris · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That sounds to me almost like saying "glue is more effective than wheels", they are for different purposes.

    Government oversight of a hotel or restaurant is supposed to make see if they meet basic health and fire codes. The health department wants the food to be safe. Reviews tell you if the good is delicious.

    1. Re: Reviews, govt are for very different purposes by alvinrod · · Score: 2

      It really depends on why someone got sick. It's entirely possible that Joe's Deli keeps a clean kitchen and has good health practices, but that they got a bad batch of ingredients from one of their suppliers (along with any other restaurant that used them) which happens from time to time. Sometimes you can do everything right, but still have things go wrong. Unless you're going to insist that Joe's Deli do extensive testing on all of their ingredients, there isn't a lot you can do about things like that.

  3. For how long? by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 2

    He was sentenced to 9 months in prison and ordered to pay approximately 8,000 Euros in costs and damages.

    I'm looking forward to reading his review of the prison on TripAdvisor! ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  4. Food poisoning typically takes 4 hours - 10 days by raymorris · · Score: 4, Informative

    Also, if someone gets sick shortly after lunch, they are likely to blame lunch; it's more likely causd by breakfast several hours before. Here's a chart from the FDA showing typical onset times for various bacteria. Rarely would one get sick within an hour. More likely the cause would be YESTERDAY'S dinner.

    https://www.fda.gov/food/resou...

  5. Only 16 percent? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think the number is *much* higher. As another comments said, I think people are good a spotting "poor" reviews. Gushing, over-the-top reviews are pretty easy to spot. The ones that are more subdued but mention the problems with bed bugs and load neighbors that I suspect are from nearby competitors are way more difficult to spot.

    Releasing numbers like "estimates are that 60% of reviews are fake" is probably a threat to their business model.

    1. Re:Only 16 percent? by techno-vampire · · Score: 2

      Yeah. I remember looking at the reviews on Google Maps for a hotel after a bad experience. Every time there was a bad review, with details, it was followed by two or three five star reviews by A GOOGLE USER with no comments. Blatant astroturfing, but it kept the hotel's rating artificially high.

      --
      Good, inexpensive web hosting
    2. Re:Only 16 percent? by jcr · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I quit using Tripadvisor the first time they yanked a negative review that I wrote. That tells me in no uncertain terms that they're not a review site, they're an ad site.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
  6. Re:Nine months for fake reviews? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Judge never been raped but spent his last vacation in a shit hole because of fake tripadvisor reviews.

  7. "many Americans believe... by Mnemennth · · Score: 2

    ...online reviews are more effective than government oversight."

    Yeah, many Americans believe in supply-side economics, too. Doesn't make it any less a fairy tale. :facepalm:

    mnem
    Sociopaths aren't cute, they aren't funny, and they aren't people to look up to; even though they are running this country.

  8. Re:Jail, for this bullshit? by BitterOak · · Score: 2

    How the fuck you gonna send someone to JAIL just for writing fake reviews? How is that shit even ILLEGAL? Fucking EU nanny-state.

    The same thing would be illegal in the U.S. It's called "wire fraud". The term "wire" refers to the fact that it takes place over an interstate communications system (this goes back to the days of telephone and telegraph), and is thus under federal jurisdiction. The term "fraud" means saying or publishing information known to be false for profit and to the detriment of others. Writing fake reviews would not be fraud; selling fake reviews is. This could land you some serious jail time over here.

    --
    If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?