Posted by
MiriamEllis
It’s 105 degrees outside my office right now, and the only thing
hotter in this summer of 2017 is the local SEO industry’s discussion of
review spam. It’s become increasingly clear that major review sites
represent an irresistible temptation to spammers, highlighting systemic
platform weaknesses and the critical need for review monitoring that
scales.
Just as every local brand, large and small, has had to adjust to the
reality of reviews’ substantial impact on modern consumer behavior,
competitive businesses must now prepare themselves to manage the facts
of
fraudulent sentiment. Equip your team and clients with this
article, which will cover every aspect of review spam and includes a
handy list for reporting fake reviews to major platforms.
What is review spam?
A false review is one that misrepresents either the relationship of
the reviewer to the business, misrepresents the nature of the
interaction the reviewer had with the business, or breaks a guideline.
Examples:
- The reviewer is actually a competitor of the business he is
reviewing; he’s writing the review to hurt a competitor and help himself
- The reviewer is actually the owner, an employee, or a marketer of
the business he is reviewing; he’s falsifying a review to manipulate
public opinion via fictitious positive sentiment
- The reviewer never had a transaction with the business he is
reviewing; he’s pretending he’s a customer in order to help/hurt the
business
- The reviewer had a transaction, but is lying about the details of
it; he’s trying to hurt the company by misrepresenting facts for some
gain of his own
- The reviewer received an incentive to write the review, monetary or
otherwise; his sentiment stems from a form of reward and is therefore
biased
- The reviewer violates any of the guidelines on the platform on which
he’s writing his review; this could include personal attacks, hate
speech or advertising
All of the above practices are forbidden by the major review platforms and
should result in the review being reported and removed.
What isn’t review spam?
A review is not spam if:
- It’s left directly by a genuine customer who experienced a transaction
- It represents the facts of a transaction with reasonable, though subjective, accuracy
- It adheres to the policies of the platform on which it’s published
Reviews that contain negative (but accurate) consumer sentiment
shouldn’t be viewed as spam. For example, it may be embarrassing to a
brand to see a consumer complain that an order was filled incorrectly,
that an item was cold, that a tab was miscalculated or that a table was
dirty, but if the customer is correctly cataloging his negative
experience, then his review isn’t a misrepresentation.
There’s some inherent complexity here, as the brand and the consumer
can differ widely in their beliefs about how satisfying a transaction
may have been. A restaurant franchise may believe that its meals are
priced fairly, but a consumer can label them as too expensive. Negative
sentiment can be subjective, so
unless the reviewer is deliberately misrepresenting facts and the business can prove it, it’s not useful to report this type of review as spam as it’s unlikely to be removed.
Why do individuals and businesses write spam reviews?
Unfortunately, the motives can be as unpleasant as they are multitudinous:
Blackmail/extortion
There’s the case of the diner who was filmed
putting her own hair in her food
in hopes of extorting a free meal under threat of negative reviews as a
form of blackmail. And then there’s blackmail as a business model, as
this unfortunate business reported to the GMB forum
after being bulk-spammed with 1-star reviews and then contacted by the
spammer with a demand for money to raise the ratings to 5-stars.
Revenge
The classic case is the
former employee of a business venting his frustrations by posing as a customer to leave a highly negative review. There are also numerous instances of
unhappy personal relationships leading to fake negative reviews of businesses.
Protest or punishment
Consumer sentiment may sometimes appear en masse
as a form of protest
against an individual or institution, as the US recently witnessed
following the election of President Trump and the ensuing avalanche of
spam reviews his various businesses received.
It should be noted here that attempting to shame a business with fake
negative reviews can have the (likely undesirable) effect of rewarding
it with high local rankings, based on the sheer number of reviews it
receives. We saw this outcome in the
infamous case of the dentist who made national news and received an onslaught of shaming reviews for killing a lion.
Finally, there is the
toxic reviewer,
a form of Internet troll who may be an actual customer but whose
personality leads them to write abusive or libelous reviews as a matter
of course. While these reviews should definitely be reported and removed
if they fail to meet guidelines,
discussion is open and ongoing in the local SEO industry as to how to manage the reality of consumers of this type.
Ranking manipulation
The total review count of a business (regardless of the sentiment the
reviews contain) can positively impact Google’s local pack rankings or
the internal rankings of certain review platforms. For the sake of
boosting rankings, some businesses owners review themselves,
tell their employees to review their employer,
offer incentives to others in exchange for reviews, or even
engage marketers to hook them up to a network of review spammers.
Public perception manipulation
This is a two-sided coin. A business can either positively review
itself or negatively review its competitors in an effort to sway
consumer perception. The latter is a particularly prevalent form of
review spam, with
the GMB forum overflowing with at least 10,000 discussions of this topic. Given that
respected surveys
indicate that 91% of consumers now read online reviews, 84% trust them
as much as personal recommendations and 86% will hesitate to patronize a
business with negative reviews, the motives for gaming online
sentiment, either positively or negatively, are exceedingly strong.
Wages
Expert local SEO, Mike Blumenthal, is currently doing
groundbreaking work uncovering a global review spam network
that’s responsible for tens or hundreds of thousands of fake reviews.
In this scenario, spammers are apparently employed to write reviews of
businesses around the world depicting sets of transactions that not even
the most jet-setting globetrotter could possibly have experienced. As
Mike
describes one such reviewer:
“She will, of course, be educated at the mortuary school in Illinois
and will have visited a dentist in Austin after having reviewed four
other dentists ... Oh, and then she will have bought her engagement ring
in Israel, and then searched out a private investigator in Kuru,
Philippines eight months later to find her missing husband. And all of
this has taken place in the period of a year, right?”
The scale of this network makes it clear that review spam has become big business.
Lack of awareness
Not all review spammers are dastardly characters. Some small-timers
are only guilty of a lack of awareness of guidelines or a lack of
foresight about the potential negative outcomes of fake reviews to their
brand. I’ve sometimes heard small local business owners state they had
their family review their newly-opened business to “get the ball
rolling,” not realizing that they were breaking a guideline and not
considering how embarrassing and costly it could prove if consumers or
the platform catch on. In this scenario, I try to teach that faking
success is not a viable business model — you have to earn it.
Lack of consequences
Unfortunately, some of the most visible and powerful review platforms
have become enablers of the review spam industry due to a lack of
guideline enforcement. When a platform fails to identify and remove fake
reviews, either because of algorithmic weaknesses or insufficient
support staffing, spammers are encouraged to run amok in an environment
devoid of consequences. For unethical parties, no further justification
for manipulating online sentiment is needed than that they can “get away
with it.” Ironically, there
are consequences to bear for lack
of adequate policing, and until they fall on the spammer, they will fall
on any platform whose content becomes labeled as untrustworthy in the
eyes of consumers.
What is the scope of review spam?
No one knows for sure, but as we’ve seen, the playing field ranges
from the single business owner having his family write a couple of
reviews on Yelp to the global network employing staff to inundate Google
with hundreds of thousands of fake reviews. And, we’ve see two sides to
the review spam environment:
- People who write reviews to help themselves (in terms of
positive rankings, perception, and earnings for themselves either
directly from increased visibility or indirectly via extortion, and/or
in terms of negative outcomes for competitors).
- People who write reviews to hurt others (for the sake of revenge with little or no consequence).
The unifying motive of all forms of review spam is manipulation,
creating an unfair and untrustworthy playing field for consumers,
enterprises and platforms alike. One Harvard study suggests that
20% of Yelp reviews are fake,
but it would be up to the major review platforms to transparently
publicize the total number of spam reviews they receive. Just the
segment I’ve seen as an individual local SEO has convinced me that
review spam has now become an industry, just like “black hat” SEO once
did.
How to spot spam reviews
Here are some basic tips:
Strange patterns:
A reviewer’s profile indicates that they’ve been in too many
geographic locations at once. Or, they have a habit of giving 1-star
reviews to one business and 5-star reviews to its direct competitor.
While neither is proof positive of spam, think of these as possible red
flags.
Strange language:
Numerous 5-star reviews that fawn on the business owner by name (e.g.
“Bill is the greatest man ever to walk the earth”) may be fishy. If
adulation seems to be going overboard, pay attention.
Strange timing:
Over the course of a few weeks, a business skyrockets from zero
reviews to 30, 50, or 100 of them. Unless an onslaught of sentiment
stems from something major happening in the national news, chances are
good the company has launched some kind of program. If you suspect spam,
you’ll need to research whether the reviews seem natural or could be
stemming from some form of compensation.
Strange numbers:
The sheer number of reviews a business has earned seems inconsistent
with its geography or industry. Some business models (restaurants)
legitimately earn hundreds of reviews each year on a given platform, but
others (mortuaries) are unlikely to have the same pattern. If a
competitor of yours has 5x as many reviews as seems normal for your
geo-industry, it could be a first indicator of spam.
Strange "facts":
None of your staff can recall that a transaction matching the
description in a negative review ever took place, or a transaction can
be remembered but the way the reviewer is presenting it is demonstrably
false. Example: a guest claims you rudely refused to seat him, but your
in-store cam proves that
he simply chose not to wait in line like other patrons.
Obvious threats:
If any individual or entity threatens your company with a negative
review to extort freebies or money from you, take it seriously and
document everything you can.
Obvious guideline violations:
Virtually every major review platform prohibits profane, obscene, and
hateful content. If your brand is victimized by this type of attack,
definitely report it.
In a nutshell, the first step to spotting review spam is
review monitoring. You’ll want to manually check direct competitors for
peculiar patterns, and, more importantly, all local businesses must have
a schedule for regularly checking their own incoming sentiment. For
larger enterprises and multi-location business models, this process must
be scaled to minimize manual workloads and cover all bases.
Scaling review management
On an average day, one
Moz Local
customer with 100 retail locations in the U.S. receives 20 reviews
across the various platforms we track. Some are just ratings, but many
feature text. Many are very positive. A few contain concerns or
complaints that must be quickly addressed to protect reputation/budget
by taking action to satisfy and retain an existing customer while
proving responsiveness to the general consumer public. Some could turn
out to be spam.
Over the course of an average week for this national brand, 100–120
such reviews will come in, totaling up to more than 400 pieces of
customer feedback in a month that must be assessed for signs of success
at specific locations or emerging quality control issues at others.
Parse this out to a year’s time, and this company must be prepared to
receive and manage close to 5,000 consumer inputs in the form of reviews
and ratings, not just for positive and negative sentiment,
but for the purposes of detecting spam.
Spam detection starts with awareness, which can only come from the
ability to track and audit a large volume of reviews to identify some of
the suspicious hallmarks we’ve covered above. At the multi-location or
enterprise level, the solution to this lies in acquiring review
monitoring software and putting it in the hands of a designated
department or staffer. Using a product like Moz Local, monitoring and
detection of questionable reviews can be scaled to meet the needs of
even the largest brands.
What should your business do if it has been victimized by review spam?
Once you’ve become reasonably certain that a review or a body of
reviews violates the guidelines of a specific platform, it’s time to
act. The following list contains links to the policies of 7 dominant
review platforms that are applicable to all industries, and also
contains tips and links outlining reporting options:
Google
Policy:
https://support.google.com/business/answer/2622994?hl=en
Review reporting tips
Flag the review by mousing
over it, clicking the flag symbol that appears and then entering your
email address and choosing a radio button. If you’re the owner, use the
owner response function to mention that you’ve reported the review to
Google for guideline violations. Then, contact GMB support via their Twitter account and/or post your case in the GMB forum to ask for additional help. Cross your fingers!
Yelp
Policy:
https://www.yelp.com/guidelines
Review reporting tips
Yelp offers
these guidelines for reporting reviews
and also advises owners to respond to reviews that violate guidelines.
Yelp takes review quality seriously and has set high standards other
platforms might do well to follow, in terms of catching spammers and
warning the public against bad actors.
Facebook
Policy: https://www.facebook.com/communitystandards
Review reporting tips
Here are
Facebook’s instructions for reporting reviews
that fail to meet community standards. Note that you can only report
reviews with text — you can’t report solo ratings. Interestingly, you
can turn off reviews on Facebook, but to do so out of fear would be to
forego the considerable benefits they can provide.
Yellow Pages
Policy: https://www.yellowpages.com/about/legal/terms-conditions#user-generated-content
Review reporting tips
In 2016, YP.com began showing TripAdvisor reviews alongside internal
reviews. If review spam stems from a YP review, click the “Flag” link in
the lower right corner of the review and fill out the form to report
your reasons for flagging. If the review spam stems from TripAdvisor,
you’ll need to deal with them directly and read their
extensive guidelines,
TripAdvisor states that they screen reviews for quality purposes, but
that fake reviews can slip through. If you’re the owner, you can report
fraudulent reviews from the Management Center of your TripAdvisor
dashboard. Click the “concerned about a review” link and fill out the
form. If you’re simply a member of the public, you’ll need to sign into
TripAdvisor and click the flag link next to the review to report a
concern.
SuperPages
Policy: https://my.dexmedia.com/spportal/jsp/popups/businessprofile/reviewGuidelines.jsp
Review reporting tips
The policy I’ve linked to (from Dex Media, which owns SuperPages) is
the best I can find. It’s reasonably thorough but somewhat broken. To
report a fake review to SuperPages, you’ll need either a SuperPages or
Facebook account. Then, click the “flag abuse” link associated with the
review and fill out a short form.
CitySearch
Policy: http://www.citysearch.com/aboutcitysearch/about_us
Review reporting tips
If you receive a fake review on CitySearch, email
customerservice@citygrid.com.
In your email, link to the business that has received the spam review,
include the date of the review and the name of the reviewer and then
cite the guidelines you feel the review violates.
FourSquare
Policy: https://foursquare.com/legal/terms
Review reporting tips
The “Rules and Conduct” section I’ve linked to in Foursquare’s TOS
outlines their content policy. Foursquare is a bit different in the
language they use to describe tips/reviews. They offer
these suggestions for reporting abusive tips.
*If you need to find the guidelines and reporting options for an
industry-specific review platform like FindLaw or HealthGrades,
Phil Rozek’s definitive list will be a good starting point for further research.
Review spam can feel like being stuck between a rock and a hard place
I feel a lot of empathy in this regard. Google, Facebook, Yelp, and
other major review platforms have the visibility to drive massive
traffic and revenue to your enterprise. That’s the positive side of this
equation. But there’s another side — the uneasy side that I believe has
its roots in entities like Google originating their local business
index via aggregation from third party sources, rather than as a print
YellowPages-style, opt-in program, and subsequently failing to
adequately support the millions of brands it was then representing to
the Internet public.
To this day, there are companies that are stunned to discover that
their business is listed on 35 different websites, and being actively
reviewed on 5 or 10 of them when the company took no action to initiate
this. There’s an understandable feeling of a loss of control that can be
particularly difficult for large brands, with their carefully planned
quality structures, to adjust to.
This sense of powerlessness is further compounded when the business
isn’t just being listed and discussed on platforms it doesn’t control,
but is being spammed. I’ve seen
business owners on Facebook declaring they’ve decided to disable reviews
because they feel so victimized and unsupported after being inundated
with suspicious 1-star ratings which Facebook won’t investigate or
remove. By doing so, these companies are choosing to forego the
considerable benefits reviews drive because meaningful processes for protecting the business aren’t yet available.
These troubling aspects of the highly visible world of reviews can
leave owners feeling like they’re stuck between a rock and a hard place.
Their companies
will be listed,
will be reviewed, and
may be spammed whether the brand actively participates or not, and they may or may not be able to get spam removed.
It’s not a reality from which any competitive enterprise can opt-out,
so my best advice is to realize that it’s better to opt-in fully, with
the understanding that some control is better than none. There are
avenues for getting many spam reviews taken down, with the right
information and a healthy dose of perseverance. Know, too, that every
one of your competitors is in the same boat, riding a rising tide that
will hopefully grow to the point of offering real-world support for
managing consumer sentiment that impacts bottom-line revenue in such a
very real way.
There ought to be a law
While legitimate negative reviews
have legal protection under the Consumer Review Fairness Act of 2016, fraudulent reviews are another matter.
Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Communication Act states:
“Unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce,
and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce, are
hereby declared unlawful.”
Provisions like these are what allowed the FTC to successfully sue Sage Automotive Group for $3.6 million dollars for
deceptive advertising practices and deceptive online reviews,
but it’s important to note that this appears to be the first instance
in which the FTC has involved themselves in bringing charges on the
basis of fraudulent reviews. At this point, it’s simply not reasonable
to expect the FTC to step in if your enterprise receives some suspicious
reviews, unless your research should uncover a truly major case.
Lawsuits amongst platforms, brands, and consumers, however, are proliferating. Yelp has sued
agencies and
local businesses over the publication of fake reviews. Companies have
sued their competitors over malicious, false sentiment, and
they’ve sued their customers with allegations of the same.
Should your enterprise be targeted with spam reviews, some cases may
be egregious enough to warrant legal action. In such instances,
definitely don’t attempt to have the spam reviews removed by the host
platform, as they could provide important evidence. Contact a lawyer
before you take a step in any direction, and avoid using the owner
response function to take verbal revenge on the person you believe has
spammed you, as we now have a precedent in
Dietz v. Perez for such cases being declared a draw.
In many scenarios, however, the business may not wish to become
involved in a noisy court battle, and seeking removal can be a quieter
way to address the problem.
Local enterprises, consumers, and marketers must advocate for themselves
According to one survey,
90% of consumers read less than 10 reviews before forming an opinion about a business.
If some of those 10 reviews are the result of negative spam, the cost
to the business is simply too high to ignore, and it’s imperative that
owners hold not just spammers, but review platforms, accountable.
Local businesses, consumers, and marketers don’t own review sites, but they
do
have the power to advocate. A single business could persistently blog
about spam it has documented. Multiple businesses could partner up to
request a meeting with a specific platform to present pain points.
Legitimate consumers could email or call their favorite platforms to
explain that they don’t want their volunteer hours writing reviews to be
wasted on a website that is failing to police its content. Marketers
can thoughtfully raise these issues repeatedly at conferences attended
by review platform reps. There is no cause to take an adversarial tone
in this, but there is every need for squeaky wheels to highlight the
costliness of spam to all parties, advocating for platforms to devote
all possible resources to:
- Increasing the sophistication of algorithmic spam detection
- Increasing staffing for manual detection
- Providing real-time support to businesses so that spam can be reported, evaluated and removed as quickly as possible
All of the above could begin to better address the reality of review spam. In the meantime,
if your business is being targeted right now,
I would suggest using every possible avenue to go public with the
problem. Blog, use social media, report the issue on the platform’s
forum if it has one. Do anything you can to bring maximum attention to
the attack on your brand. I can’t promise results from persistence and
publicity, but I’ve seen this method work enough times to recommend it.
Why review platforms must act aggressively to minimize spam
I’ve mentioned the empathy I feel for owners when it comes to review
platforms, and I also feel empathy for the platforms, themselves. I’ve
gotten the sense, sometimes, that different entities jumped into the
review game and have been struggling to handle its emerging complexities
as they’ve rolled out in real time. What is a fair and just policy? How
can you best automate spam detection? How deeply should a platform be
expected to wade into disputes between customers and brands?
With sincere respect for the big job review sites have on their hands, I think it’s important to state:
- If brands and consumers didn’t exist, neither would review
platforms. Businesses and reviewers should be viewed and treated as
MVPs.
- Platforms which fail to offer meaningful support options to business owners are not earning goodwill or a good reputation.
- The relationship between local businesses and review platforms isn’t
an entirely comfortable one. Increasing comfort could turn wary brands
into beneficial advocates.
- Platforms that allow themselves to become inundated with spam will
lose consumers’ trust, and then advertisers’ trust. They won’t survive.
Every review platform has a major stake in this game, but, to be perfectly honest, some of them don’t act like it.
Google My Business Forum Top Contributor and expert Local SEO, Joy Hawkins, recently wrote
an open letter to Google
offering them four actionable tips for improving their handling of
their massive review spam problem. It’s a great example of a marketer
advocating for her industry, and, of interest, some of Joy’s best advice
to Google is taken from Yelp’s own playbook. Yelp may be doing the best
of all platforms in combating spam, in that they have very strong
filters and place public warnings on the profiles of suspicious
reviewers and brands.
What Joy Hawkins, Mike Blumenthal, other industry experts, and local
business owners seem to be saying to review platforms could be summed up
like this:
“We recognize the power of reviews and appreciate the benefits they
provide, but a responsibility comes with setting your platform up as a
hub of reputation for millions of businesses. Don’t see spammed
reputations as acceptable losses — they represent the livelihoods of
real people. If you’re going to trade responsibly in representing us,
you’ve got to back your product up with adequate quality controls and
adequate support. A fair and trustworthy environment is better for us,
better for consumers and better for you.”
Key takeaways for taking control of review spam
- All local enterprises need to know that review spam is a real problem
- Its scope ranges from individual spammers to global networks
- Enterprises must monitor all incoming reviews, and scale this with software where necessary
- Designated staff must be on the lookout for suspicious patterns
- All major review platforms have some form of support for reporting
spam reviews, but its not always adequate and may not lead to removal
- Because of this, brands must advocate for better support from review platforms
- Review platforms need to listen and act, because their stake in game is real
Being the subject of a review spam attack can be a stressful event
that I wish no brand ever had to face, but it’s my hope that this
article has empowered you to meet a possible challenge with complete
information and a smart plan of action.
more to come!~
