Grigory Potemkin was the chief minister to Russian Empress Catherine the Great. To convince the Empress that his policies were spurring development in some of the Empire's far-flung reaches, he is alleged to have had empty villages comprised of fake store and house fronts built on the routes she was going to take as she surveyed her domain.
That story may or may not be apocryphal, but it stands for fraudulently conveying a false sense of value created. Which is precisely the problem that may be emerging with product and service reviews in corporate social media.
The idealistic vision was that networks of friends and associates would share information and attitudes about products and services, spurring purchases by those who were in on the conversation. This sparked a scramble by brands to try to penetrate those groupings in order to drive some of that business their way. And, not surprisingly, things got a little out of hand.
It started with book reviews on Amazon. Once the causal relationship between positive reviews and book sales became apparent, authors began asking all their friends and family members to submit good reviews - whether they had read the book or not (never mind whether they liked it). Publishers, with as much or more at stake as the authors, decided this was too important to leave to mere volunteers. So the word got out that for a positive review, hungry college students - or hungry anyone - could collect a quick $5 or $10. It has snowballed from there.
Bonuses, promotions and job security are stake in a parlous economy. So an 'everyone is doing it' mentality has grown up around social commentary. Most of the fake reviews are positive. But suspicion is growing that unscrupulous competitors are not above sponsoring critical reviews as well.
We live in a cynical age. The use of experts in advertising has given way to comical spokes-figures like geckos as a result. Whether people suspect their friends' opinions are for sale is probably not so much a question of violated trust as a realization that people will do what they can to get by. This may not even detract from the power of social media advertising, which has not yet met expectations in any event. But it does suggest that anyone pinning their hopes either on the future of that market - or on the veracity of the attitudes it conveys may be in for disappointment. The economics of online opinion-making were simply too important to be left to amateurs. JL
Francis Bea reports in Digital Trends:
Product reviews, whether coming from Amazon, Rotten Tomatoes, or Yelp, can make or break your Internet marketing efforts. There’s a lot at stake and that means plenty of outlets resort to illicit practices (read: faux users and spambots) to improve their reputation. In a Gartner study, analysts found that by 2014, between 10 and 15 percent of social media reviews will be faked. Over half of the Internet population use social networks, and a handful of those platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, and Google+), house a dense concentration of users that are sharing and promoting content on their own accord. It is word of mouth 2.0 and it’s a powerful and lucrative marketing opportunity. So powerful, in fact, that analysts predict that at least two Fortune 500 companies will face litigation from the Federal Trade Commission in the next two years for illicit social media practices. “Organizations are scrambling for new ways to build bigger follower bases, generate more hits on videos, garner more positive reviews than their competitors and solicit ‘likes’ on their Facebook pages,” Jenny Sussin, senior research analyst at Gartner said in a statement. Just scanning Craigslist jobs shows you the potential for careers in faux brand promotion. Desperate companies will often offer a small compensation in exchange for a positive review of their product, even if the reviewer never set foot within the restaurant or never used the product in question. It seems like a harmless scheme that quickly pays a few bucks, but the FTC ruled that reviews for products without appropriate disclosures, including being paid off or receiving a free gift, is a deceptive advertising strategy and can be prosecuted with a fine. Several years ago, the FTC’s Guide Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising impacted the blogging community, which responded angrily. Bloggers under this ruling have been required to disclose to readers of any payments, affiliations, or free products recieved in exchange for a review. While the noise around blogging has died down, criminal online and social media practices have consequently evolved. Businesses can easily purchase “Likes” on Facebook or “Followers” on Twitter for a low as five dollars on sites like Fiverr. Anyone resorting to this strategy would know that they would be acquiring fake users or users that have no interest in your business, but with the pressure on marketers to perform, paying to bolster a company’s reputation with a few more thousand followers can be incredibly tempting. “Marketing, customer service, and IT social media managers looking to use reviews, fans and ‘Likes’ to improve their brand’s reputation on social media must beware of the potential negative consequences on corporate reputation and profitability,” said Ed Thompson, Gartner Vice President and analyst. While companies tangle with this ethical and legal dilemma surrounding social media practices, Facebook has made strides with shutting down accounts and removing “Likes” that fail to abide by its terms of service. As we reported, as many as 83 million accounts are “fake” accounts, and Facebook’s latest effort to clean house affected less than one percent of any given Facebook Page.
0 comments:
Post a Comment