Product Review Manipulation

[Woodenskye (Bryan)]

Thread transferred from previous forum - Original Post by Kev

Original Post:

Wanted to start a conversation here in an open part of our forums on the subject.

Most of you are aware of the issues I've had with ACME and I'll have a video out on that this next week.  However, in an unrelated post on the Wood Whisperer's FB group today, a member posted about one product that duplicated a review from a similar product.  Of course, I posted that I was pretty sick of manipulated reviews being used to entice people to purchase products.  In my case, a review not being allowed for very vague reasons.

Anyway, Marc chimed in and stated that he had actually been offered money to change his review.  Ultimately, Marc did the honorable thing but, it brings up the question around how often is this stuff happening?  Any of you guys had similar circumstances?

Is there a site out there that doesn't allow bogus reviews on any given product?  Do we need to start one?

I'll continue my battle to try and get ACME to post my review of the PM2000B but, wanted to generate some conversation out here on the subject.

Follow Up Posts:

1)  I generally don't put much stock in reviews, partly because I think a lot of them are paid for. Whether that is paid by a manufacturer to people that are "professional reviewers" or through sponsorship. I will try to leave most of my personal opinions about specific people private. With that said, the example you gave that Marc was approached to change his review proves my point. I would guarantee Marc (maybe not in this specific case) and other prominent content creators have all changed there reviews at some point for money, retaining a sponsorship or getting a free be. I mean they wouldn't refund you the $3K for your lemon, but will give plenty of people full shops of PM equipment. Marc and the others aren't moving sales enough to justify the free machines, but by hitching their wagon to prominent content creators who give favorable reviews creates a degree of trust amongst the uninformed public.
I don't know if there is any site that doesn't allow bogus reviews, as long as it isn't a robot.

2)  Pretty much sums up my point!  Paid ads, to me, is just about the same as a manipulated review.  I give credit to Marc (more so in years past) offering honest reviews of various products.  If you look at many of the woodworking content creators, they're doing ads on a regular basis for items that have nothing to do with wooodworking!  I take those with a gain of salt and don't fault them for taking the business.  However, I also feel pretty confident that those creators aren't doing reviews on the various sites for those items they've been paid to do ads for.

My issue lies more in bogus reviews for products, or reviews being removed, by the product manufacturer or the middle guy selling those items.  This deception can be far more harmful to the consumer as they're not informed.  At least content creators are generally up front enough to tell you if it's a paid slot.

I recently had my first sponsor and was up front in my video to say so.  In my case, it was my local HW dealer who supplied the lumber for the project.  This is on the bathroom vanity which should see videos released shortly.  No actual money changed hands, only lumber.

So, how do we fix the issue?  

Do we need a legitimate site to offer reviews?  If so, how do we be sure those reviews are actually legitimate and not just a "product beef" site?  

Do we offer a place to post reviews when places won't allow a review or moderate a review?

Do we just continue to call these places out when we see them?  Where do we do this?

Do we contact the businesses state attorney general and the BBB when this happens? - I've done this on my current issue.  I'll update how this worked out.

Do we petition government to regulate this stuff? - For the record, I'm not for this option!

Is there anything we as consumers can do to correct this?

3)  I have tried twice to post my response by quoting your post at each question, and each time what I wrote was lost, so here goes.

1) I don't mind if you are a content creator and take sponsorships. If I was a creator I would probably do the same. However at what point are you willing to compromise your integrity and what obligation are you to tell the whole story? For example a lot of people are taking sponsorships for simple safe security systems. If 6 months down the road your shop or house was robbed or the system just doesn't work, are you allowed to update your video to your viewers that the product is junk? Are these guys just saying oh well check cleared. This can be just as deceptive as a bogus review.

2) Agree that this can be harmful to the consumer. Being upfront that a video is sponsored is fine, but are we certain that they are being completely honest, they have a following and could be just as deceptive.

3) Congrats! The rest of this isn't directed at you specifically. So whether you took money or just the lumber, what are your obligations for entering into this deal.. For example, the lumber you got looks fantastic, once you start milling you realize it is absolute garbage, are you able to say as much? Is your obligation to the sponsor or to inform your viewers? I realize a guy from NJ isn't going to use your HW dealer in Montana, but what if the product or manufacturer was common to the masses. Would you not being able to tell people because of the agreement be deceptive?

4) I am not smart enough to probably ever be able to fix 100%.

5) how or where would this legitimate site be located? Now the way to ensure that reviews are legitimate, the only real way to ensure is for the reviewer to provide proof of purchase.

6) If there was a review place here that would be good, the real question is how do you direct the masses to these verified reviews. Other forums have review sections, but again how do you verify they are legitimate, and how do you direct people who aren't active. The way the world is now, social media might be the best way to provide or direct people to an honest review.

7) yes, as consumers we should continue calling these places out. Again social media may be best.

? yes we should contact the state AG, BBB or other consumer affairs agencies. They need to be aware this is going on, whether they do anything is another issue, but at least the consumer can put the ball in their court like you did.

9). I agree that petitioning the government isn't an option. They really should have enough more pressing issues they could actually try to solve.

10) just keep calling out the shady manufacturers or retailers out and keeping the pressure on them.

4)  Usually when I read reviews I read the lowest reviews first to see what the problems are and if I can deal with them. If none of the reviews say anything negative I don't trust them. No product is perfect for everyone and everyone's situation in my mind. The difficulty in knowing if a review is legitimate is there is sometimes no way to know. If I did a review of a Powermatic saw, it would be taken as legitimate I am guessing, even though I don't own one and have never used one. People don't know, what they don't know usually.

As an interesting aside, with all the security systems the youtubers pushed recently I looked into them and they can be easily defeated with a cheap part from amazon. It was posted by LockPickingLawyer, which I have been watching lately. Which is why I will look on youtube for reviews if the purchase is important or expensive.

5)  A few things here...

Sorry you were having issues with posting!

1.  Fair observation and good question!  I doubt very seriously that they'd be allowed to go back and edit the video.  Essentially, I would think the product owner now owns the content of that video since they paid for that product.  

2.  You're absolutely correct.  The ones that really annoy me are the woodworking videos being sponsored by something unrelated to woodworking and they'll do their ad in the middle of the woodworking to ensure you see it!

3.  There's a fine line in this question that has to be walked!  If the product is crap and the content creator is pushing it anyway then, that says a lot about their integrity right?  The problem is will anyone ever know?  That is the definition of "integrity" right?  What you do when nobody is looking?  In my case with the HW dealer, I picked out the lumber so, no issues.  Towards the end of the project, I was a little bit short on lumber so, dug into my pile.  I let them know and the boards were immediately replaced.  I guess my point here is that if the product were absolute crap or I didn't believe in or use the product I wouldn't take the sponsor.  I think by maintaining that way of dealing with sponsorships that when I do take one, viewers will be a little bit more confident that I do actually believe in the product.

5.  Agree completely!  There are lots of questions around how to make it legitimate!  Will certainly need someone way smarter than I to work through the issues..  Kind of like "Angie's List" but for web sites..

6.  Social media is great for the initial review.  However, the information is lost so quickly that it's hard to come back and search for that information.

Thanks for the responses!

6)  I read reviews very much the same way..  Looking for the negative stuff first.

I also think people are more likely to leave a review if they have something negative to say.  I think I'm guilty of that as well.  Not leaving reviews because the item didn't create me any issues.  Perhaps I should go back and leave reviews for the various tools in my shop that I do enjoy using..

On the Simplisafe stuff, it's just a paid ad.  Personally, I prefer the way that Jay Bates handled the ad in that he dedicated an entire video to it and didn't hide that it was an ad.  As for defeating it, well no system is perfect.  Frankly, the cost point on the system is pretty low so, I'm sure it gives people some peace of mind.

7)    The posting issue is probably on my end so no need to apologize for that.  (CC = Content Creator)

1) I know in most situations the CC needs to submit for review prior to release, which basically means the sponsor is controlling the message, which is standard practice in any ad or marketing. The CC probably owns the rights to the video, but likely has restrictions after its release. So in the end is the CC giving an honest review/infomercial or compromising for the money.

3) Your sponsorship was probably a bad example but was the info I had in this case. You are 100% correct that this is where integrity comes in. Can you trust the CC has integrity. Now a lot of these guys say I won't recommend a product I don't believe in, but is this truthful. For you I would say yes, for others who rely on this as there sole income not as sure, which is why I am highly skeptical of all of these guys. We will never know if these guys are compromising their integrity or not.

I have a hypothetical for you. You have retired and CC is your sole income. You do a video saying your looking for a new saw, PM comes to you and says you have to do an unboxing and project video and they give you the saw. You have all the same issues you had, but PM quietly replaces all the issues and says you can't mention it, would you send the saw back and forget the sponsorship, or would you publish an honest video that the saw is junk? This is where the issue of integrity and what the CC is willing to compromise on comes into play and why can their word really be trusted.

8  This is really easy for me to answer!  I would simply refer to the reviews that I've already done and would not accept the saw.  Maybe I'm just too old school but, I believe a person is only as good as their word but, to accept a free saw at the expense of my integrity is a price that's just too high.

Now, let's say a different manufacturer wants to send me a saw and asks for a review and a project in exchange for the saw.  Well, this would require a conversation about being honest with the review.  In the end, I would do an honest review and if they didn't like the review then, they could have the saw back and I would most likely still post the review unless I was contractually barred from doing that.  It would all have to be discussed up front before accepting the saw.

I will still do this when I retire but, it is my intention to not count on any money generated by it.  This way I can turn this stuff down and maintain my integrity.

9)  On the subject of companies not being up front on things. I pre-ordered a Milwaukee m18 cordless router from ToolNut.com and have twice received emails stating the router was delayed by Milwaukee. I copied the email below. The interesting thing is I just picked one up at my local Home Depot and it is sitting in my garage as I type this. I even paid for expedited processing from ToolNut. Will be cancelling my order with them and won't be pre-ordering from them again. All other tool purchases I have made with them have been great, this was my first pre-order I made. I don't mind the delay so much as telling me things that aren't true on the reason for the delay.

Email:
Thank you for your recent purchase of the new Milwaukee M18 FUEL Compact Router.

Milwaukee notified us recently that this new tool's introduction has been delayed. Based on the latest information, we expect to ship this new tool on or around December 1st. We always strive to provide our customers with the most accurate product availability from manufacturers, however note that this date is subject to change.

This delay affects all Milwaukee retailers and The Tool Nut will receive the first inventory for this new tool.

10)  I went through something similar with Rockler and therefor, rarely order from them anymore either.  On multiple occasions, I placed an order that their site said was in stock only to get an email a few days later telling me that the items were on back order.  On at least 2 occasions, I needed the items for client projects which either delayed my delivery of the project or caused me to buy locally at a much increased cost.