Company Fined $300,000 For Posting Fake Reviews Online

[TimGross]

I know a lot of Warriors have review sites, and there have been previous discussions here about the morality and legality of creating "product review" pages which essentially are just endorsement links to affiliate products.

This cosmetic surgery company was fined $300,000 for posting fake reviews:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/te...et/15lift.html

Here are a couple of quotes from the article:

New York’s attorney general, said in a statement that Lifestyle Lift’s “attempt to generate business by duping consumers was cynical, manipulative and illegal.”

"Lifestyle Lift said in a statement that it 'regrets that earlier third-party Web site content did not always properly reflect and acknowledge patient comments or indicate that the content was provided by Lifestyle Lift.”

Discuss.

[WritingMadwoman]

There have been rumors that they are cracking down, and this is a good example and I'm sure it's just the beginning. Having your employees pose as satisfied clients for something as serious as cosmetic surgery - I can't really feel sorry that they got fined!

Wendy

[Keithp]

Good!!! I hope it is a trend!

[Marty S]

"The company had ordered employees to pretend they were satisfied customers and write glowing reviews of its face-lift procedure on Web sites, according to the attorney general’s statement."

Well there is reviewing, and then there is outright lying. Shame on them.

[Shaka]

Thank you for alerting us to this information. I learned many years ago, from my direct marketing days, to always maintain written copies of endorsement letters in the company file and to make sure they are legit.

Back then people were caught posting fake testimonials and the FTC and some local authorities took the bigger scammers to task for it. Hopefully your posting will help keep warriors out of review/testimonial trouble with enforcement authorities.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

This is a bit different that what most IMers do when it comes to review sites, and I'm glad that they were taken to task for it.

[nebraska]

If you research a product and write the review yourself, you should be ok. There are a lot of people with either scraped content as reviews or reviews. Google is cracking down on them if they're blatantly not doing an actual review for sure.

[Charles Washington]

So copying reviews from Amazon and other online retail sites is Taboo? I have seen quite a few WSO's over the past six months that stress getting real reviews, but getting them from other sites. Technically, those types of reviews are not fake, just not unique. Right?

Discuss...

[JohnMcCabe]

Originally Posted by Marty S

"The company had ordered employees to pretend they were satisfied customers and write glowing reviews of its face-lift procedure on Web sites, according to the attorney general’s statement."

Well there is reviewing, and then there is outright lying. Shame on them.

And the difference between posting glowing reviews because your boss tells you to do it, and posting glowing reviews of a product that you've never seen in the hopes of getting a commission is...?

Originally Posted by Steven Carl Kelly

This is a bit different that what most IMers do when it comes to review sites, and I'm glad that they were taken to task for it.

I'm glad they got nailed, too. I still don't see the difference between lying to keep a paycheck and lying to try to get one, though...

Originally Posted by Charles Montgomery

So copying reviews from Amazon and other online retail sites is Taboo? I have seen quite a few WSO's over the past six months that stress getting real reviews, but getting them from other sites. Technically, those types of reviews are not fake, just not unique. Right?

Pulling reviews and comments from multiple sources is fine in my book as long as you're transparent about the source of the information. When you copy and paste those comments out of context and post them as new material, without attribution, you're being deceptive.

Collecting actual customer reviews from multiple sources and summarizing them is providing a useful service for page visitors even if you have no direct experience with the product yourself.

[Sven Schoene]

Great post, John! Finally someone who shares my views on the stuff that a lot of affiliate marketers are doing...

[marciayudkin]

And the difference between posting glowing reviews because your boss tells you to do it, and posting glowing reviews of a product that you've never seen in the hopes of getting a commission is...?

If you review a product you have never seen, then it is lying, plain and simple.

Someone I know posts nice reviews on Amazon of books she's never read. Maybe to win brownie points with the authors? Whatever her motivation, that's wrong and most authors I know would not be happy to find out about it.

Marcia Yudkin

[Kay King]

I've seen quite a few new products promoted where there are multiple site results, positive reviews, recommendations, claims of profit from use or ease of use, on and on....where every site can be traced directly back to the person who launched the product.

The sites/blogs/reviews often use different pen names and may fill the first full page or two of google results....and sometimes those pen names are also "testimonials" on the sales page. If I were doing this type of "marketing", I'd be folding up the tent right about now.

I don't think there is much risk for affiliates who are writing review style sites or landing pages, but there might be a risk for sellers marketing with multiple personalities.

kay

[Adam Bshero]

This was coming for a long time... but until someone around here gets busted, I doubt affiliates will stop writing review pages. Additionally, how can they differentiate the people who are giving actual reviews from the people who are making them up?

[Marty S]

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

And the difference between posting glowing reviews because your boss tells you to do it, and posting glowing reviews of a product that you've never seen in the hopes of getting a commission is...?

I have a highly rated review site and have never reviewed a product using either of these strategies. That is the difference.

[Matt Helphrey]

Wow! $300,000 is no small fee. So much for trying to earn an easy buck...cheaters

[tommygadget]

$300K is a drop in the bucket. Just the cost of doing business for them. Like the spammers who bomb out email inboxes and make $100 million dollars and pay $5 million in fines.

TomG.

[Kevin AKA Hubcap]

Like this is anything new. There are numerous reviews in print media that are biased towards their biggest advertisers....

but passing off employees as customers is wrong.

[GarrieWilson]

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

Pulling reviews and comments from multiple sources is fine in my book as long as you're transparent about the source of the information. When you copy and paste those comments out of context and post them as new material, without attribution, you're being deceptive.

If I setup a page selling the howling moon shirt as an affiliate or not and use the reviews from Amazon for the SAME product and I dont tell them they are from Amazon, it's not deceptive. The reviews are for the product. BUT it could be a copyright violation.

[homebasedmom]

Bad Karma. That's what you get when you cheat.

[Raiel Schwartz]

About time. I think "review" sites which are just product endorsements with affiliate links are long due for an overhaul.

A lot of people talk about "giving value" to your visitors and customers, but with review style websites, unless you actually PURCHASED the content or REVIEWED the material, you shouldn't be offering your opinion on it.

[Kevin Koop]

While I appreciate Tim posting this info, it's important to keep a proper perspective.

There is nothing wrong with creating review sites and they are still a very viable vehicle for affiliate marketing.

This "news" just highlights something that should be obvious... it's important to be honest in your marketing. This adds protection from legal troubles, frequently increases conversions as many can sense your honesty and provides for better sleep (for me, at least ;- ).

[geolt7]

I think this case is particularly serious due to the impact it has on the consumer. The company obvious do not have regard for the safety and wellbeing of her customers and must be penalized.

[webatomic]

Let's hope this spreads to the Web Hosting industry!

[davemiz]

seems like they were posting fake reviews on OTHER websites.... little different than flogs or review sites regular affiliates setup.

[Truffle]

Originally Posted by Marty S

"The company had ordered employees to pretend they were satisfied customers and write glowing reviews of its face-lift procedure on Web sites, according to the attorney general’s statement."

Well there is reviewing, and then there is outright lying. Shame on them.

Exactly, reviewing is stating the facts and benefits of a certain product and provide real customer feedback as well.

Giving out false customer feedback is fraud my opinion and that fine should've been a lot more severe + jailtime for those employees and even more severe for the business owners

goes to show that you can't go with that company anymore, they don't have any real satisfied customers so they make them up.

Stuff like that pisses me off, lousy wanna-be business-people ....

[Troy_Phillips]

I always buy a product before I review it . Well actually some of the warriors on here have given me a copy to review so I guess I should say I have used the product before I review it .

While I usually don't do many review sites ... a lot of my reviews are directly to my list . I love list members . Give them a raving review for a crap product and they have no problem calling you out on it .

[Mike Hill]

It definitely would have been much cheaper to give every employee and their families a free face lift and take those reviews instead of being fined $300,000.

With that kind of scratch they could have pulled off a Time-Square (Gary Halbert) type of promotion.

Mike Hill

[Jon Steel]

they will learn from this ... everyone who does this should -

js

[clbeav]

Just an example that when you cheat to make money, you better be prepared for the repercussions. I'm won't shed a tear for them, they deserved it.

[Fernando Veloso]

Glad to see someone (finally) taking actions against fake reviews. One thing that crossed my mind while reading this is how are they going to track website owners outside US...?

[russellprisco]

Forgive me if I repeat anyone... I didn't read ALL of the posts... but I think the main difference is that they were more or less falsifying numerous testimonials of sorts as opposed to giving one main opinion (or review) on the company's behalf.

There's nothing wrong with giving a review on 1 or more products...

Hefty fine though... phew... glad it wasn't me =P

~Russell Prisco =)

[AndyCamden]

Wow! Sometimes those things happen.

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by russellprisco

Forgive me if I repeat anyone... I didn't read ALL of the posts... but I think the main difference is that they were more or less falsifying numerous testimonials of sorts as opposed to giving one main opinion (or review) on the company's behalf.

There's nothing wrong with giving a review on 1 or more products...

Correct, that is the distinction. It is one thing for me to write a review on my own site about a product and to either recommend or not recommend it even if I haven't actually tried the product (unless I said that I had) and it is quite another to misrepresent yourself as the recipient of a service like cosmetic surgery and to then go to OTHER sites, posing as a surgical patient, and post glowing reports on the quality of a surgery you never received.

Also, regarding Amazon reviews:

If you are part of the Amazon affiliate program, you have access to Amazon product data, including reviews. In fact, they are accessible through Amazon's API. Using those reviews are allowable under the Amazon affiliate program TOS, unless I am mistaken.

[ChrisBa]

Looks like finally people are accountable for what they say and claim

[marciayudkin]

It is one thing for me to write a review on my own site about a product and to either recommend or not recommend it even if I haven't actually tried the product (unless I said that I had)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand this.

Of course it is possible to have a description of a product you haven't tried (you use copy provided by the manufacturer). However, how is it possible to write a review of a product you have not tried?

If it is presented or labeled as a review, doesn't that imply that you have tried it?

How can you give a valid opinion of a product you have not tried?

I am having trouble understanding how that can be done in a non-deceptive way. Whether or not you explicitly say you have tried it, if you endorse it (as opposed to simply describing it), aren't you implying this opinion is based on personal experience?

Marcia Yudkin

[Steven Carl Kelly]

Originally Posted by marciayudkin

I'm sorry, but I don't understand this.

Of course it is possible to have a description of a product you haven't tried (you use copy provided by the manufacturer). However, how is it possible to write a review of a product you have not tried?

If it is presented or labeled as a review, doesn't that imply that you have tried it?

How can you give a valid opinion of a product you have not tried?

I am having trouble understanding how that can be done in a non-deceptive way. Whether or not you explicitly say you have tried it, if you endorse it (as opposed to simply describing it), aren't you implying this opinion is based on personal experience?

First, understand that I would never, ever say that I've used a product that I hadn't. In fact, if I wrote a personal "review" of a product and I hadn't used it, I would state explicitly that in the review. To do otherwise is unethical, potentially illegal, and just bad business.

That being said, there are a number of ways to provide review-like information on a product (although some might argue that these aren't technically "reviews"):

- I can review the product information and offer my opinion on what the product is promising and the relative cost ("Though I haven't purchased this product, in my opinion the price seems very reasonable for the benefits being offered. If this product actually delivers what it says..");

- I can review the product's Web site and related materials ("I've taken a close look at the site and decided against purchasing this product based on...");

- I can gather information about the product from around the Web and provide information about my findings as a form of "review" ("In trying to find information about this product, I found a number of articles from several well-known figures in the PPC and the consensus appears to be...").

Of course for some, these aren't the hard-edged "buy this" that they're looking for to make big conversions. But again, I would never, ever write an actual, personal, substantive review of a product that I hadn't used).

[davemiz]

i agree with everyone but it seems like what they were busted for is all together different than having a "flog"....

[JohnMcCabe]

Originally Posted by davemiz

i agree with everyone but it seems like what they were busted for is all together different than having a "flog"....

In other words, lying on someone else's blog is wrong, but lying on your own blog is okay?

[marciayudkin]

- I can review the product information and offer my opinion on what the product is promising and the relative cost ("Though I haven't purchased this product, in my opinion the price seems very reasonable for the benefits being offered. If this product actually delivers what it says..");

- I can review the product's Web site and related materials ("I've taken a close look at the site and decided against purchasing this product based on...");

- I can gather information about the product from around the Web and provide information about my findings as a form of "review" ("In trying to find information about this product, I found a number of articles from several well-known figures in the PPC and the consensus appears to be...").

Thank you, these are interesting examples. I'm wondering, though, what the value is to your reader of these sorts of comments. Or is the point just to rack up some search engine credits or links? I'm a little lost about why you would do this, what you're really contributing to the conversation about this product and why someone should find value in reading something like this.

Marcia Yudkin

[davemiz]

JohnMcCabe

dude, where the hell did you get that from? cmon man.... dont put words in someones mouth.

not cool.

they were busted not because of the flogs.... those things are everywhere... they really got the hammer because they did it on other sites with fake reviews.

thats what i was saying.

[yves]

I have a landing page that basically highlights the benefit of the product I am promoting and how it can help someone with a specific problem and tell them what the product includes. I also included 2 or 3 testimonials from the clickbank sales page because they were actually brilliant.

I did a lot of research on this product and hold the vendor in high regard. He gives his affilates a lot of promotional stuff and helps out a lot. The product has very little refunds and sells very well. I have not tested the product for myself but havn't professed to do, do you think I should take it down?

I'm a bit worried now.

Yves

[JohnMcCabe]

Originally Posted by davemiz

JohnMcCabe

dude, where the hell did you get that from? cmon man.... dont put words in someones mouth.

not cool.

they were busted not because of the flogs.... those things are everywhere... they really got the hammer because they did it on other sites with fake reviews.

thats what i was saying.

And I was saying that I don't see a moral difference between "flogs" posting fake reviews on a site they may own and posting fake reviews on someone else's site.

What is a "flog" anyway? It's a phony blog posting imaginary positive experiences for the purpose of making sales.

What did these people do? They posted imaginary positive experiences for the purpose of making sales.

Tomato, tomahto, my friend...

[Angela V. Edwards]

Originally Posted by Mike Hill

It definitely would have been much cheaper to give every employee and their families a free face lift and take those reviews instead of being fined $300,000.

With that kind of scratch they could have pulled off a Time-Square (Gary Halbert) type of promotion.

Mike Hill

Yeah, or they could have advertised in the local paper that they'd do 5 free facelifts or something like that if the folks who got them would give honest feedback at the end. I'm sure they would sign ups for something like that.

[dsmpublishing]

I think its about time that they are doing something about it - ive seen lots of fake reviews by internet marketers on the net and maybe this will help improve the situation for others.

kind regards

sam
X

[GarrieWilson]

What if someone put up a sales letter with a "flog" format?

The reviews are comments, the heading is the subject, etc.

Do you see a difference? It still might confuse people but some people are confused about everything.

[viralim]

No matter how you look at it, it's false advertising. Fake reviews/testimonials is just one aspect of it.

[JohnMcCabe]

Originally Posted by GarrieWilson

What if someone put up a sales letter with a "flog" format?

The reviews are comments, the heading is the subject, etc.

Do you see a difference? It still might confuse people but some people are confused about everything.

Why use the "flog" format for a sales letter unless the intent is to confuse and deceive people?

A lot of folks here are trying hard to find shades of gray in a black and white issue. Especially when you're messing around with someone's health.

A few years ago, my wife's mother lost her battle with Parkinson's. During that battle, my wife and I spent a lot of time trying to research what the doctors were telling us.

Now, I knew better and my wife is a natural skeptic when it comes to stuff on the Internet. Were it otherwise, we could have been badly misled by information posted online just to make a buck.

"It's only a flog. Lots of people do it. It's not like I lied on someone else's site by posting a phony review. That's not the same as promoting an ebook I haven't read and offering phony testimonials so desperate people will buy the book and I make a quick buck. I mean, I need the money."

Now before anyone else accuses me of putting words in their mouth, nobody actually said that. Most who seemed to condone flogging for dollars try to spin it so it doesn't seem so bad.

In my opinion, that fine should have been accompanied by jail time for the people who came up with the scheme and forced it on their employees.

And, he said to no one in particular, if you're so deep in the **** you have to pull that kind of shenanigan to eat, at least do it head on. Have the huevos (or ovaries) to look yourself in the mirror and own up to it.

[GarrieWilson]

Originally Posted by JohnMcCabe

Why use the "flog" format for a sales letter unless the intent is to confuse and deceive people?

A flog sales letter might put them more at ease. Is that a bad thing? To me, its no different than color, fonts, layouts, etc. to do the same thing.

Now the "news" format I do have issues with.

I am also talking about using 100% true information.

In my opinion, that fine should have been accompanied by jail time for the people who came up with the scheme and forced it on their employees.

They where not forced and IMHO are just as guilty.

-g

[davemiz]

lol.... i agreed with the comments. When you read some of the comments its easy to see these people didn't 'get' why they got busted.

They got busted for posting fake reviews on other sites, (which probably get TONS of traffic and are very visible) they didn't get busted because they send ppc traffic to flogs. (which are what most people do, its really annoying, but they work like crazy, go figure).

thats all i said.

[JohnMcCabe]

Originally Posted by GarrieWilson

A flog sales letter might put them more at ease. Is that a bad thing? To me, its no different than color, fonts, layouts, etc. to do the same thing.

Now the "news" format I do have issues with.

I am also talking about using 100% true information.

If part of that 100% true information is a disclosure of the affiliate relationship, fine. Otherwise, you have to consider the difference between "putting them more at ease" and suckering them in.

They where not forced and IMHO are just as guilty.

-g

If in truth they were not forced, then they are just as guilty and should do some time along with their bosses.