Corruption of Amazon Reviewers

By Tuesday June 28, 2011

People will say that magazine writers get free reviews of products too. Yes, but they do not pose as a casual member of the public and disclose anything out of the ordinary…



25 Comments
  1. bobbo, in Repose says:
    6/28/2011 at 8:17 am

    I’m not going to watch the long video for the same reason I don’t “really” read Amazon reviews: just some dick’s opinion. I have my own.

    With such attitude, I still would enjoy anyone’s opinion on the time mark that something interesting/revealing is said. I’d go to that mark just as I did on the Gold video, or any other video/audio resource presented here.

    The relevant value in all these reviews/opinions posted here/any other list of comments—-is to pick the “facts” out and apply your own value system to them. You can do the same when talking to everyone you talk to. Doesn’t make you very popular unless you wrap it in socially acceptable pleasantries. All good things to learn/apply/be conscious of.

    Heh, heh.

  2. JimD says:
    6/28/2011 at 8:47 am

    I don’t watch the videos either – I’d rather read the text – it is much FASTER and I don’t need some helmet-head to read it to me !!!

    But the idea that the “Reviewers” on Amazon might be PAID SCHLOCK-MEISTERS is SHOCKING ! TOTALLY SHOCKING !! – NOT !!!

    Not everything on the Web is true !!!

  3. sargasso_c says:
    6/28/2011 at 9:52 am

    I agree with JimD, and it is very obvious and it has been so for a long time that many if not most of the reviews are professionally written and that the most popular reviews are those which follow and repeat the marketing material of the item.

  4. BigBoyBC says:
    6/28/2011 at 10:03 am

    Reviews can be helpful, but always should be taken with a grain of salt. I’ve been shopping on Amazon for years, I’ve become fairly good at spotting fake reviews, both positive and negative ones. But Amazon is not the only place you’ll find fake reviews. The old adage “buyer beware” is just a true today as it’s ever has been, maybe even more.

  5. Sister Mary Hand Grenade of Quiet Reflection says:
    6/28/2011 at 10:31 am

    OFF TOPIC: Google has a new web site today called, “What do you love?”

    You guys need to check this out, http://www.wdyl.com/#pussy

  6. bobbo, in Repose says:
    6/28/2011 at 10:39 am

    See Results of Images for Pussy: No Results were Found.

    whaaaaa?

  7. CapitanJan says:
    6/28/2011 at 10:46 am

    Very interesting John! Thank you!

    I guess the whole social media buzz is about corrupt tribes trying to influence online opinion.

  8. wirelessg says:
    6/28/2011 at 10:48 am

    Okay, I “listened” to the video and it was good for the same kind of chuckles that you get when your computer-illiterate parents talk about older technology with a childlike wonderment.

    Most of the above opinions are correct, but the cringe-worthy aspect of this video is that he starts out implying that Amazon has some automaton reviewing methods which includes plagiarism, but his findings debunk that decade old accusation.

    Just as cringe-worthy was the time and effort that went into the independent study of reviewer demographics, which could have been accomplished by Amazon over a weekend or as an ongoing metric.

  9. bobbo, in Repose says:
    6/28/2011 at 10:51 am

    In unrelated news, I thought Dilbert was especially funny today:

    http://uclick.com/client/wpc/dt/?wpisrc=nl_tech

  10. Dudley Do-Right says:
    6/28/2011 at 11:53 am

    Reminds me of a case in the news some time ago where a most avid fan for what i recall was a recording artist – whom was a major big time amateur fan of the artist -posting on all sort of dominant blogs in that field – expounding the artist’s merits and products was caught to be an employee of the recording firm
    He or she blogged from work and the ip internet address was tracked back
    Sounds to me something you might expect Dudley Do-Right of the Mounties Police to do with his Commodore 63

  11. Jeanne says:
    6/28/2011 at 12:34 pm

    Whenever I read on-line reviews, I am amazed by the crude nature of the shill reviewers. They don’t make the same kind of spellling and grammatical errors of (probably) valid reviewers. They either are ultra-positive or ultra-negative in their reviews and do not even pretend to temper this, as would a valid reviewer.

    This makes me wonder what percentage of readers believe unquestioningly what they are reading. But then again, there are people out there that believe it is okay to send money via Western Union & that a Nigerian Prince is reaching out to them.

  12. Zybch says:
    6/28/2011 at 1:36 pm

    #9 Dilbert is NEVER funny.

    As for these kinds of reviews, I just ignore the 1 and 5 star ones. Those left are a pretty good indication of the product.

  13. General Tostada says:
    6/28/2011 at 2:00 pm

    “People will say that magazine writers get free reviews of products too.”

    I assume what was meant was: “…magazine writers get free products for reviews too.”

    Whatever, I think one must approach ANY reviews that are included in a given company’s presentation skeptically, even if they seem as though they’re trying to be “balanced”.

    The Smiling Face of The Nice (er, pathological) Corporation.

    (and btw, I loved that “Auntie Ammy” moniker…reminds me of the old “Ma Bell” one…)

  14. Sister Mary Hand Grenade of Quiet Reflection says:
    6/28/2011 at 2:20 pm

    Anyway, if the URL above was hosed, try this: http://tinyurl.com/3ruk2fx

    Google did a nice job with the aggregation. I usually read church related shit.

  15. surilamin says:
    6/28/2011 at 2:39 pm

    The induviduals in the audience or rude and have clearly never used Amazon

  16. The Internet says:
    6/28/2011 at 4:07 pm

    What people believe prevails over the truth.
    Duh
    #winning

  17. Rider says:
    6/28/2011 at 4:21 pm

    All you really need to do is go to a site like textbroker pay 10 cents a word and you can have all the positive reviews you want.

  18. deowll says:
    6/28/2011 at 4:29 pm

    I already knew by reading reviews that some reviews were cut and past with only slight alterations.

    I think this is a bigger problem in books than in fans, and lawn mowers but I could be wrong.

  19. John E. Quantum says:
    6/28/2011 at 4:33 pm

    #14 We thought all you read was the label on your lube.

    Where would the world be without pussy?

  20. GregAllen says:
    6/28/2011 at 5:00 pm

    This confirms what I suspected. If a product has only one review, it’s almost always glowing.

  21. Sister Mary Hand Grenade of Quiet Reflection says:
    6/28/2011 at 7:03 pm

    #19 – You are soo right! What else could start out looking like a delicate flower and then end up looking like a bulldog eating mayonaise?

  22. ABC says:
    6/28/2011 at 7:27 pm

    Two things…

    1) I’m 42mins in, and the statement at this point is that the reviewers are doing it for no compensation other than “leveling up” in the review rating system. As kind of a hobby. Many are also approached by publishers offering review books, and claim that they are not biased.

    2) This is a farking lecture… why are the assholes in the audience conducting a dialogue with the lecturer when they’re so clearly unfamiliar with the basic subject matter, and are incapable of listening to the findings without first questioning the margin of error in the sampling… let the guy f!@king speak.

  23. The0ne says:
    6/29/2011 at 12:20 am

    What is this about? I’m not about to watch the video. It’s funny to me though how people vehemently refuse to read others reviews/opinions and they are on the web doing the very exact same thing in the hopes that some other poor fellow can read theirs. Imagine if we all had our own opinions and didn’t give a “dick” care for others and we actually stuck to our own beliefs. Man, what DU would be like without those people. Sadly, it’s a world of ignorance 🙂 People with unwavering convictions and ideals wanting it from others 🙂

    Now, that alone has made my day…well…early morning now.

  24. Glenn E. says:
    6/30/2011 at 4:23 pm

    Since Amazon bought out the IMDb.com, it doesn’t surprise me that some “reviewers” of books and other Amazon products, might be just phony as some of the Commenters who contribute to the IMDb. They’ve been doing that for years now, I suspect. Liking even some of the most horrid movies, because some studio paid them to write a glowing praise review. But they often can’t do just one, or even just a ten. They’ll do dozens and dozens. And be very long winded about it. A good give away that they’re pros. Rarely would anyone else waste their time, devoting paragraphs to so many current films, if it weren’t their job. So they were fairly easy to spot. But then Amazon bought IMDb and started allowing multiple fake IDs for that same applicant. So they can spread their professional praise, under more than one name. I generally just read the negative and mixed reviews. And ignore the positives. The negatives are generally more honest and realistic. And more fun to read too.

  25. Buzz Mega says:
    7/1/2011 at 9:10 am

    I am socked.

    Socked, I tell you.

    h h


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5471 access attempts in the last 7 days.