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

171–180 of 198 posts

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

#171

Post by mumblemumble »

TRcontrarian wrote: post #158
mumblemumble wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm finding Wirecutter to be less-than-useful, though. There's the question marks around their funding model, but the deeper problem is their "the best X" format. It requires setting up a very specific rubric that tends to favor Cadillac models, and leaves you with very little information to go on if you don't have Cadillac needs. Concrete example: I recently bought a new office chair. My shopping process involved a…

The funding model is extremely sus. I used to trust them but your criticisms are right on, and their 'the best x' lists have a curious tendency to prioritize brands that already have high ad spend, rather than surface little known indie choices.

The possible saving grace of their funding model is that, even if the manufacturer itself doesn't have an affiliate program, they can probably still get some sort of affiliate link through Amazon or Wal-Mart.

That said, there's just no amount of "not actually sketchy" that will prevent this sort of revenue model from seeming sketchy. Hard not to wonder if there are small Internet-only companies that only sell direct-to-consumer who are being shut out of independent reviews, or are feeling pressure to give them a cut in order to avoid being cut out.

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

#172

Post by jedberg »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #95
jedberg wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true in the real world again (still?) too. We're currently stocking up on disinfecting wipes to donate to the school when they open next month. We've been told that the teachers only want brand name Clorox wipes, because they don't trust any other brand to actually disinfect safely.

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 parents don't and there is no budget for staff. There needs to be a tradeoff there. Spend a little more on supplies to save time so you don't have to hire a janitor to come around every hour and wipe down the classroom.

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

#173

Post by mumblemumble »

tjs8rj wrote: post #157
fearling wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

This has been mentioned before but I’ve done this for a while: searching “[product] reddit” often does the trick when looking for candid reviews. Normal people with nothing to gain except internet points (which just incentivizes them to give the popular consensus or fantastic failure of the product).

Though, I would still go stalk the reviewer a bit and make sure they're a real person. Reddit isn't necessarily any less amenable to astroturfing than amazon.com or bestbuy.com; the only thing that might be protecting it right now is that it's currently not as big a pot of honey.

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

#175

Post by TheCoelacanth »

spoonjim wrote: post #120
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…

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.

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

#176

Post by fmajid »

dragontamer wrote: post #143
bombcar wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah snap they’re on to me. :(

There's also "rival company" reviews. I've heard from some business friends in the Hotel business that rival Hotels are probably leaving bad reviews on Yelp. And there's pretty much nothing you can do about it. You look at a review, you back-check the date and try to line it up with customer records. You look for complaints, you ask staff if they remember the customer. Etc. etc. Ultimately, its a phantom, clearly a m…

And even more devious, companies paying people to leave obviously fake positive reviews for competitors so they get afoul of what little review verification Amazon does, and banned:

https://www.theverge.com/2018/12/19/18140799/amazon-marketpl...

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

#177

Post by rsj_hn »

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.

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

#178

Post by jimhefferon »

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 they engage in many practices they decry in others. It is at best not clear that they are on the good folks side.

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

#179

Post by TheCoelacanth »

BitwiseFool wrote: post #35
ssharp wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you order McDonalds, you probably know what McDonalds should taste like. If it meets 100% of your expectations, why would you rate it lower? Similarly, if I get a meal from Michelin Star rated restaurant and it fails to meet my high expectations, should it get a better rating than McDonald's just because the restaurants meal was still likely much better than McDonald's even if it failed to meet expectations?

In practical terms it dilutes the value of 4 and 5 star reviews for other restaurants. There's some cognitive dissonance involved when McDonald's gets a 4.6/5 and a mom and pop haute-cuisine restaurant gets a 4.6/5 as well. These are two very different dining experiences but they are being judged using the same system and feels inaccurate.

There is no sensible way to compare fine dining to McDonald's.

The rating should be based on how well they deliver what they purport to deliver. If McDonald's delivers the absolute epitome of a fast-food burger and fries then it should get a 5/5, even if tastier food can be found at other restaurants.

Haute cuisine with a mediocre execution should get a 3/5 even if it's tastier than a McDonald's hamburger.

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

#180

Post by meddlepal »

spoonjim wrote: post #142
esturk wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they're going to Reddit, they'll have to put in a lot more effort than just using bots to post fake reviews. For some subreddits like r/BuyItForLife, it's not about the number of upvotes. Some people just gravitates toward old fashion goods.

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.

Post reply on HN