Would Amazon and Google benefit from publishing fake consumer reviews?




It doesn’t sound right, but new research says that sites that collect consumer reviews on businesses and products should leave fake ones untouched.
Results from a study — “A Tangled Web: Should Online Review Portals Display Fraudulent Reviews?” — from researchers at Carnegie Mellon University and the University of Washington published in the Information Systems Research journal show that 85 percent of consumers would like a choice in deciding if they want to incorporate fake review information into their decision-making when it comes to businesses and products.
“We find consumers have more trust in the information provided by review portals that display fraudulent reviews alongside nonfraudulent reviews, as opposed to the common practice of censoring suspected fraudulent reviews,” said Beibei Li, Anna Loomis McCandless chair and associate professor of IT and management at Carnegie Mellon. “The impact of fraudulent reviews on consumers’ decision-making process increases with the uncertainty in the initial evaluation of product quality.”
The research points to the critical role that reviews play in purchasing decisions, with 97 percent of consumers consulting reviews at some point when deciding what and when to buy. The growing role of reviews has brought with it an increase in fake ones. Prof. Li cites industry and media reports that show fraudulent reviews make up between 15 and 30 percent of all those posted.
The study points to the different approaches that various platforms have taken to address fake reviews. Google deletes them, Amazon.com censors them and Yelp publishes them with a notation that they may be faked.
Using “large-scale” Yelp data, 80 percent of respondents in the survey said they trust platforms that leave and call out potential fakes because they believe the practice makes businesses less likely to try and rig the system. Fake reviewers are, in essence, called out for cheating for all to see on the review page.
- New Research Says Displaying Fake Reviews Increases Consumer Trust in Review Platforms by 80% – INFORMS/Information Systems Research
- A Tangled Web: Should Online Review Portals Display Fraudulent Reviews? – Information Systems Research
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS: How significant a role do you think business and product reviews play in purchasing decisions? Do you agree that online platforms such as Amazon and Google would benefit more by publishing and calling out fake reviews rather than censoring them?
Join the Discussion!
27 Comments on "Would Amazon and Google benefit from publishing fake consumer reviews?"
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Worldwide Director, Industry Strategy, Microsoft
If they publish AND call out the fake reviews, then the practice stands to nurture trust in the platform by consumers. Even if they don’t catch all of the offending commentary, a demonstrable effort should appeal to shoppers who may regard reviews with healthy skepticism.
It’s a little easier to fake Yelp reviews – anyone can post a poor (or glowing) restaurant critique.
What I’d like to see more of is “validated purchase” reviews where only those who have actually bought and PAID for the product are featured.
Consulting Partner, TCS
Yelp gives the ability to see “other reviews that are not currently recommended.” It makes sense.
Reviews can also be marked with other indicators – verified purchase (which Amazon already does), likely fake, influenced by seller, etc.
The platforms have their own interest in ensuring the trust. We already see when reviews on a seller’s website are very likely inflated/fake.
Consultant, Strategist, Tech Innovator, UX Evangelist
Verified purchase DOES NOTHING to validate a review. It validates a purchase and many gamers of the system pay associates to “purchase” an item so they can “legitimize” their fake reviews.
Consulting Partner, TCS
“Does nothing” is an opinion. It is better than an unverified purchase — again, in my opinion.
When verified purchases are gamed as you suggest, it can also be tagged as “suspect” or “potentially fake.” Verified and Fake are not mutually exclusive.
Ultimately, the platform has to do what it can to earn trust.
Consultant, Strategist, Tech Innovator, UX Evangelist
The core problem is that platforms don’t detect when they are being gamed or possibly, know and don’t do much about it. Amazon specifically has terms against it, yet (as with fake merchandise) and despite some progress, they are woefully insufficient at stopping it. So mutual exclusivity is irrelevant.
Director of Partnerships, Operations, and Legal, MarketDial
This really all comes down to brand and platform credibility. Because nearly all consumers engage with reviews at some point, and because platforms and brands have manipulated reviews for far too long, consumers have grown weary of review boards filled only with 5-star reviews. Though fake reviews distort the market and potentially undercut a market fundamental–the study indicates that instead of misleading consumers, they are a sign to consumers that the brand or platform has not censored the review page, granting even more credibility to the good reviews. However, it seems the best way for platforms to have their cake and eat it too is to mark fraudulent reviews as fraudulent. This way they maintain credibility while diminishing the misleading effect of fake reviews.
Founder, President, Bakertown Consulting
Reviews are a critical part of the buying process for many consumers – therefore, fake reviews should be deleted or called out so the customer can make the most informed decision.
Managing Director, GlobalData
Reviews are important to shoppers. They may not be the primary driver of the purchase decision, but they are often a factor in brand or product selection or in nudging a customer to buy. Flagging fake reviews is an interesting option that may work on some platforms. The main thing is to be transparent about how reviews are handled and to ensure that customers can trust what they are reading. If fake reviews are left on sites, it would be good to have the option to filter them out or exclude them to make viewing easier.
Principal, KIZER & BENDER Speaking
Like many consumers, I rely heavily on reviews and I trust them to be authentic. Posting reviews that are known to be fraudulent offers no value to the consumer.
Deleting fake reviews saves customers time and potentially money by preventing them from having to send back products that do not work as promised. Calling out potential fakes just clutters the feed. Who has the time to wade through fake reviews when you are trying to make a purchase?
Founding Partner, Merchandising Metrics
So now we are trying to make “fake reviews” (fake news?) a good and acceptable and even desirable thing? How will they/we know they are fake? How can we be sure that all fake reviews will be caught? What ever happened to clarity, truth telling, transparency? When does “fake” become fraudulent? How about if you lie you get booted off the site? Somehow “fake” doesn’t sound as bad as telling an outright lie with intent to deceive. And research tells us that’s a good thing. I don’t get it.
Professor of Food Marketing, Haub School of Business, Saint Joseph's University
This decision is pretty straightforward. Reviews are an important part of the consumer decision making process. Consumers want fake reviews left in but called out. There may be a time when “information overload” kicks in for consumers. At such time, review sites should consider more censorship options, particularly in light of 15 percent to 30 percent of posts being fake. But for now leave them in and call them out.
Chief Commerce Strategy Officer, Publicis
Content Marketing Strategist
What a wild paradox.
Fake reviews clutter consumer decision-making by exaggerating benefits and editing inconvenient truths. Yet leaving the reviews up and calling them out publicly shames anyone trying to scam the system.
This transparent approach is influential because online reviews directly affect brand trust, sales and internal morale. It could persuade shady players to rethink their efforts to manipulate their public reputation.
That’s why Amazon and Google may want to consider all their options to protect consumers from fraudulent products and companies.
President, b2b Solutions, LLC
Reviews can play a strong role in a customer’s purchase decision especially if it is for a product or service that they are unfamiliar with. They can support or counterbalance the information the service supplier or the manufacturer provides.
Any information that indicates the validity of the review is helpful. If no review is called out by the site the customers are left to decide if they should trust any or all of the reviews.
Retail Strategy - UST Global
If it’s really “fake” then it just shouldn’t be published. Why give fraud any visibility at all?
Co-Founder at Where and Share
Reviews are a form of “social proof,” which is a selling tactic in itself. Reviews have a significant enough impact on decision making. As consumers demand more transparency from companies, I think Amazon and Google will benefit more from flagging fake reviews than just censoring them. Flagging shows a certain level of transparency and that due diligence is being done to weed out bad actors.
CEO, Currency Alliance
Vice President, Partnerships at WhyteSpyder, Inc.
I cannot say this strongly enough; publishing fake reviews — anytime, anywhere — is a horribly bad idea. Consumers MUST have confidence in what they are reading and seeing on any platform. Fake reviews in any context are a bad idea that damages the credibility of all reviews, everywhere.
Strategy & Operations Delivery Leader
E-commerce purchase decisions are especially influenced by online reviews. However, as we have seen the trust and transparency we expect to see on Amazon, Google, and other sites has diminished somewhat with the increased amount of fake or biased reviews.
Without the benefit of a physical store/showroom, and a knowledgeable store associate to help influence the purchase decision, our first instinct is to read the product reviews and then make our own assessment if we want the product or not. Publishing fake reviews is absolutely unacceptable, and will take away from these platforms trust and credibility they have built over the years. There is zero business benefit to this.
Vice President, Research at IDC
Founder | CEO, Female Brain Ai & Prefeye - Preference Science Technologies Inc.
Consultant, Strategist, Tech Innovator, UX Evangelist
Cynthia, although we can’t expect any platform to be 100%, you have encapsulated the review “problem” eloquently:
“Come on, who can truly believe Google and Amazon have not developed software to identify fake reviews? Bezos is going to Mars and yet Amazon in 20 plus years as a retailer has not cracked the code to identify fake reviews? In light of this discussion, now is a good time to suspend disbelief, avoid logic, and forget critical thinking.”
CFO, Weisner Steel
More than anything else, I think this survey confirms that what people say and what they actually want/do is quite different. Oh sure there are plenty of people out there who see themselves as would-be Columbo’s, gleaning intelligence from fake reviews, but the reality is, 4 out of 5 (5 out of 5? Heck, maybe 6 out of 5) would be screaming louder than Howard Beale when (not “if”) they get taken in.
At the same time, people are suspicious — sometimes justifiably so — when they are told info has been withheld, so the solution, methinks, is to identify what doesn’t meet clearly defined criteria and quietly remove it; let the tin-foil hat brigade say what they will.
President, Protonik
Looks like more research where the researchers asked questions the respondents didn’t understand. When a review is a known fake, I can’t imagine any situation where a customer isn’t well served by Amazon or Google hiding that review.
In fact, my first response was that this research was sponsored by the bloggers and content providers who make millions using fake reviews to drive people to Amazon, Google, and to marketer websites.
The research around shiny new baubles like online reviews has been very poorly done throughout the history of the internet. Guess marketers have no one to blame but ourselves for relying on research like this.
(I think RetailWire does an important service bringing it to our attention. Thanks!)
Business Growth Coach, Founder & CEO of Ambrose Growth
It is interesting to note that Google, Amazon, and Yelp all monitor reviews themselves instead of relying on a neutral, trusted third party. Considering the importance of reviews in purchasing decisions, and considering the potential negative impact on their reputation if consumers had the impression that some sites had more fake reviews than others (regardless whether this was true or not), a different business model could have emerged. Organizations like the Better Business Bureau or JD Power could have risen to the occasion and could have developed capabilities as the experts in checking reviews’ credibility, across all platforms.
CEO, President- American Retail Consultants
No. Publishing fake reviews is akin to deceiving your customers and questioning the veracity of the product being mentioned, as well as the manufacturer, and of course the web retailer. Reviews should be edited to maintain a high level of truth, and reinforce an ethical position for the website as well.
CEO/Founder, Crobox
Ninety-three percent of consumers say reviews affect their purchase decisions. Reviews are super important but, of course, dependent on the product. A t-shirt may not have many reviews, while running shoes or electronics are important to see other people’s experiences. Fake reviews, on the other hand, don’t provide any customer value, but Amazon and Google shouldn’t censor them. Instead they should call out the fake ones so consumers have the autonomy to ignore them or not. Twitter does this well – flagging posts for sensitive content while making it up to the user to decide if they want to see it or not.