Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

reviews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 198 posts

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#181

Post by rightbyte »

jedberg wrote: post #172
lotsofpulp wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Surely buying a brand name disinfectant by the gallon and paper towels and a spray bottle are orders of magnitude cheaper. And probably orders of magnitude better for the environment?

If you're an engineer, and when you get back to your job you're told that you are now responsible for wiping down your workstation every hour, your first response will probably be, "I'm an engineer that's not my job" and your second response will be, "ok fine but make it as easy as possible". Teachers are not supposed to be cleaning their classroom or teaching your kids about hygiene, but they have to now because par…

Teachers already might have a flower spray can with soap and a cloth for the board.

One-use prewet papertowelsheets might be overengineering the issue.

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#182

Post by spoonjim »

meddlepal wrote: post #180
spoonjim wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes but one Reddit comment has a lot more weight right now because of the ease of astroturfing, so it doesn’t need to be a Bot. Someone posts a Swiss Army knife and someone else might say, “I love my Swiss Army Knife that my grandfather left me. Oddly enough my aunt thought it was lost and bought me a knockoff from Amazon and it actually works better than my grandfather’s knife.” Then someone replies saying “what was…

with Reddit tho you can look through a users post history to see how likely they are a bot. I'm not saying its perfect by any stretch.

And there is a market for buying up old Reddit accounts for that. People cultivate karma on Reddit accounts posting about cats and memes and then sell them to brands looking to appear authentic.

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#183

Post by spoonjim »

TheCoelacanth wrote: post #175
spoonjim wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are also retailers which actually vet brands. For example anything edible that Target or Walmart or Trader Joe’s or Whole Foods (Amazon ownership notwithstanding) sells in their stores, they actually contract a testing company to test it to make sure that it’s safe. For things where safety is important an actual physical national store is going to be much better than Amazon.

That's still relying on brand name, just the brand of the retailer instead of the brand of the manufacturer.

Yes — but one retailer can aggregate hundreds of manufacturers. So if you buy everything at Target, for example, you know they have done a basic-level quality filter for you: the brands are not counterfeit, the food is tested occasionally, the electronics are UL listed.

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#184

Post by everdrive »

rsj_hn wrote: post #177
everdrive wrote: post #7

As well they should. This is a game of cat and mouse. Consumers were ahead for a little while, but companies have really gotten a grasp on the internet, and they're winning the information war. It's no mistake that I've come to rely on brand name again. It's the best heuristic available to me. When all this first started (mid-2000s) I was actively avoiding basing ANY decision on brand name. For a brief window, I had…

Why not look at consumer reports ( https://www.consumerreports.org/ )? I purchased a subscription and use them quite a bit. The problem here is in willingness to pay. If companies are willing to pay to promote their product, you will need to pay to get objective information. Any attempts at free objective information is going to be vulnerable to pollution by those willing to spend resources.

I find that their ratings are often not very meaningful, at least for products that I feel informed. They don't seem very objective, and instead feel like a testimonial from a certain kind of person. If you happen to have similar sensibilities, then their ratings may work out quite well for you. I've never had that experience with them, though.

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#185

Post by rsj_hn »

everdrive wrote: post #184
rsj_hn wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not look at consumer reports ( https://www.consumerreports.org/ )? I purchased a subscription and use them quite a bit. The problem here is in willingness to pay. If companies are willing to pay to promote their product, you will need to pay to get objective information. Any attempts at free objective information is going to be vulnerable to pollution by those willing to spend resources.

I find that their ratings are often not very meaningful, at least for products that I feel informed. They don't seem very objective, and instead feel like a testimonial from a certain kind of person. If you happen to have similar sensibilities, then their ratings may work out quite well for you. I've never had that experience with them, though.

Then you will need to find a group that shares your tastes, but the consumer reports approach (if not their specific tastes) is the long term solution, IMO.

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#186

Post by PoignardAzur »

flanbiscuit wrote: post #138
breckenedge wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you can’t really trust those either since companies will review competitor’s products negatively. These days I just ask coworkers and friends and family

Yeah the whole system is gamed. This is my process: - check out the reviews that actually post pictures - read the 1-stars to see what happened. - Do a google search for "best X product" to see if product shows up there. Sift through the many many bullshit sites set up to make money from Amazon affiliate links. Sometimes a result sticks out that I feel like I can easily trust, like if I'm looking for hiking equipment…

> Check out Reddit. Also take these with some scrutiny because Reddit has already been infiltrated by marketing companies willing to pay for fake reviews & upvotes

Yup.

An interesting case study for me was trying to find a reliable modafinil provider.

It's illegal in most western countries but won't actually get you thrown in jail, so you can't use the usual marketplaces, but people still feel comfortable recommending it on reddit.

The end result is that any possible subreddit you can find dedicated to provider recommendations is filled with paid recommendations that people made in exchange for discounts. The only subreddits that have serious non-shill discussions are the ones that ban recommendations.

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#187

Post by daniel-cussen »

sharkweek wrote: post #30
everdrive wrote: post #7

As well they should. This is a game of cat and mouse. Consumers were ahead for a little while, but companies have really gotten a grasp on the internet, and they're winning the information war. It's no mistake that I've come to rely on brand name again. It's the best heuristic available to me. When all this first started (mid-2000s) I was actively avoiding basing ANY decision on brand name. For a brief window, I had…

I used to trust Amazon for just about anything I needed to buy, but I'd guess maybe in the last 6-8 years I'll mostly only order something if I recognize the brand name selling me the product. Tried to buy a pair of cheap-ish bluetooth headphones off there a few months ago. Three different pairs and none of them even worked out of the box. Gave up and bought a more expensive pair from a known brand.

What I noticed about Amazon is they do make it obvious something is a counterfeit, but only after the fact. Up until you buy it it looks legit and they make it hard to tell it's not, but after it's gotten to you they know you know and they want you to think it was your fault for falling for an obviously fake listing. That's when they display the real listing, to make you feel stupid.

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#188

Post by HomeDeLaPot »

Shivetya wrote: post #141
everdrive wrote: post #7

As well they should. This is a game of cat and mouse. Consumers were ahead for a little while, but companies have really gotten a grasp on the internet, and they're winning the information war. It's no mistake that I've come to rely on brand name again. It's the best heuristic available to me. When all this first started (mid-2000s) I was actively avoiding basing ANY decision on brand name. For a brief window, I had…

Oh my, I am at the point I only read the 1 star reviews and maybe 2 star reviews. Worse dealing with Amazon is a royal pain when the company fulfilling the order ships the wrong item. Brand names are a fine method to follow but not when sellers ship the wrong model/version/etc.

But all the 1 star reviews are from competitors!

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#189

Post by dredmorbius »

A few ideas:

- Reviews should be normalised to a reviewer's mean score. If a person hands out 5/5s like there's no tomorrow, those rate as 2.5/5s.

- The whole notion of collaborative filtering is that some information is (usually) better than none. This is often the case, but in a situation where 100 people are tasked with evaluating a skyscraper, jet airliner, pharmaceutical, or software design, where 1 is a domain expert and 99 are not ... I'd slant my weight in favour of the domain expert, generally. (A jury of experts might be more suitable.) Otherwise, the information is simply noise.

- Massive penalties and downratings for both reviewers and retailers who game the system. Zero those motherlovers out. Put some skin in the game.

Amazon (and every other review site) has a massive reputation problem here, and it will (and is) biting them.

Re: Almost 40% of U.S. Consumers Trust Online Reviews Less Than They Did 5 Years Ago

#190

Post by dredmorbius »

fearling wrote: post #51
everdrive wrote: post #7

As well they should. This is a game of cat and mouse. Consumers were ahead for a little while, but companies have really gotten a grasp on the internet, and they're winning the information war. It's no mistake that I've come to rely on brand name again. It's the best heuristic available to me. When all this first started (mid-2000s) I was actively avoiding basing ANY decision on brand name. For a brief window, I had…

> It's no mistake that I've come to rely on brand name again. Big +1 here. Brand name is a core part of my decision making process at this point. Otherwise, I'm relying on word of mouth. Occasionally , I'll use some of the more "reliable" independent review services.

Sadly, brand names are also caught up in this bullshit. I've had purchases (electronics, household appliances, clothing, food, ...) from long-trusted brands, direct from manufacturer or established retailer, turn to shit. Some have stood behind their products. Others ... have not.

Samsung especially is on my shitlist.

Take Google and Amazon as two other examples.

Post reply on HN