UK Times Article On Fake TripAdvisor Reviews
Nov 12th, 2006, 02:08 PM
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK Times Article On Fake TripAdvisor Reviews
Nov 12th, 2006, 02:47 PM
#2
You mean, you can't trust everything you read on the Internet? How quaint!
In all seriousness, when anyone can post annonymously on a site, and if the site is respected, it will eventually be degraded by manipulators.
In all seriousness, when anyone can post annonymously on a site, and if the site is respected, it will eventually be degraded by manipulators.
Nov 12th, 2006, 03:10 PM
#3
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One way to get a handle on Tripadvisor reviews is to click on the name of the poster and see what other hotels they have reviewed. It helps put the remarks in perspective.
Another is to cross-check the reviews against other websites that have user reviews. Some that I frequent are venere, holiday city and slow travel.
Another is to cross-check the reviews against other websites that have user reviews. Some that I frequent are venere, holiday city and slow travel.
Nov 12th, 2006, 07:11 PM
#5
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 17,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a recent case in which a somewhat (IMO) obscure guest house suddenly rose to the top of the hotel reviews for London..and it didn't take that many reviews to do it.
I think you have to read many, if not all of them, very carefully. Sometimes the writing style is a giveaway, for example.
Anonymity has its plusses and minuses I guess.
I think you have to read many, if not all of them, very carefully. Sometimes the writing style is a giveaway, for example.
Anonymity has its plusses and minuses I guess.
Nov 12th, 2006, 08:16 PM
#6
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've read a few articles about Tripadvisor and fake reviews but I'm surprised hotels are offering their guests special perks to write a positive review.
I agree, the new feature of being able to click on a person's name is helpful to see the other person's reviews but I guess people wanting to comit fraud enough will go theough the troubles of making a number of false reviews to look legit.
I am amazed by one hotel in London's positive reviews, I won it through through Priceline and I still feel like I was taken. Actually the Priceline price wasn't a discount at all since another well known internet broker was offering a superior accommodation at the same price, I found out later. There are plenty of negative reviews on Tripadvisor but I am really surprised when people rave about it.
I agree, the new feature of being able to click on a person's name is helpful to see the other person's reviews but I guess people wanting to comit fraud enough will go theough the troubles of making a number of false reviews to look legit.
I am amazed by one hotel in London's positive reviews, I won it through through Priceline and I still feel like I was taken. Actually the Priceline price wasn't a discount at all since another well known internet broker was offering a superior accommodation at the same price, I found out later. There are plenty of negative reviews on Tripadvisor but I am really surprised when people rave about it.
Nov 13th, 2006, 12:30 AM
#8
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agencies like Trip Advisor, Lonely Planet, Let's Go, Virtual Tourist, Frommer's and Fodor's all provide an improtant service - and for free.
If one has not yet learned to read 'between the lines' then yes one can be fooled - but then some people will always be foolable (is that a word?).
To quote a poster on another travel site: "Do not discount the value of TA's website format just because a minority of unscrupulous people take advantage for their own greedy purposes. The overall value and purpose of all travel forums is the unimpeded dissemination of current travel information, free of cost, including here at ... where unscrupulous posters can do and have done just as much to discredit those of us who truly choose to help others with travel advice. Ultimately it's up to those asking the questions to sift through this advice and decide for themselves whether or not to act upon it."
If one has not yet learned to read 'between the lines' then yes one can be fooled - but then some people will always be foolable (is that a word?).
To quote a poster on another travel site: "Do not discount the value of TA's website format just because a minority of unscrupulous people take advantage for their own greedy purposes. The overall value and purpose of all travel forums is the unimpeded dissemination of current travel information, free of cost, including here at ... where unscrupulous posters can do and have done just as much to discredit those of us who truly choose to help others with travel advice. Ultimately it's up to those asking the questions to sift through this advice and decide for themselves whether or not to act upon it."
Nov 13th, 2006, 04:12 AM
#11
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 17,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The printed version of the article is rather longer and more informative (and critical) about Fodors
It wasn't about this bit: it referred to the hotel rating section (under "hotels" above), which isn't subject to peer-review.
Fodors are quoted in the real article as saying they're now going to pre-vet - whatever that means - "reviews" in the hotel section before publication.
It wasn't about this bit: it referred to the hotel rating section (under "hotels" above), which isn't subject to peer-review.
Fodors are quoted in the real article as saying they're now going to pre-vet - whatever that means - "reviews" in the hotel section before publication.
Nov 13th, 2006, 05:17 AM
#12
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue of unbiased hotel reviews is hardly new, and hardly limited to anonymous amateurs. Plenty of so-called 'professional' reviewers have come under fire for either accepting free lodging or meals while they 'review' the establishment, or being paid directly for the service, or even for merely failing to maintain anonymity while they conducted their research.
As for fodors, ira has already pointed out that people here tend to be quite suspicious if a first-time post consists of a glowing review of this or that service. In other words, reviewers themselves here get reviewed, in a sense. At least, this is true for the country boards, which, unlike the rants and raves section, are set up to allow for immediate feedback from the readership.
As for fodors, ira has already pointed out that people here tend to be quite suspicious if a first-time post consists of a glowing review of this or that service. In other words, reviewers themselves here get reviewed, in a sense. At least, this is true for the country boards, which, unlike the rants and raves section, are set up to allow for immediate feedback from the readership.
Nov 13th, 2006, 05:32 AM
#14
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 17,549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect that this board, the Fodors rants and raves, TripAdvisor are all the same in one way: when they STOP meeting people's needs or they are conceived as unreliable, a reaction takes place.
I suspect anything such as a drop in the number of visits to this website which can ultimately jeopardize the amount of revenue Fodors can bring in from advertisers who were told about the "traffic volume" here will lead to a change.
And, as we know that as even in some churches, the most important part is "the money!"
I suspect anything such as a drop in the number of visits to this website which can ultimately jeopardize the amount of revenue Fodors can bring in from advertisers who were told about the "traffic volume" here will lead to a change.
And, as we know that as even in some churches, the most important part is "the money!"
Nov 13th, 2006, 05:41 AM
#15
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 895
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For sometime there has been someone on the BBC Travel boards writing under a number of aliases (18 at one point, and about 8 at present) and giving misleading information or just copying information from internet sites. I tried to explain to them how you could ruin someone's holiday by telling them to go somewhere in the rainy or hurricane season and offering misleading informnation they might rely on.
I do not always give a good review on travel sites when people ask about a place and some people have moaned about that (notably the lack of things to do in Tokyo here recently). I think they should know about "warts and all" so they can make an informed decision, and be pleased if everything is just as they want it. Better that than a troubled holiday.
The online encyclopedia, wikipedia is a prime example of what can happen. People now quote it as true yet it has many mistakes as anyone with an interest in something can spot. I will sometimes correct a mistake I come across there but it is a lifetime's job for someone. The people who run it clearly are more interested in nice looking articles (wikified) than accuracy and within reason, anyone can write anything they want there.
I do not always give a good review on travel sites when people ask about a place and some people have moaned about that (notably the lack of things to do in Tokyo here recently). I think they should know about "warts and all" so they can make an informed decision, and be pleased if everything is just as they want it. Better that than a troubled holiday.
The online encyclopedia, wikipedia is a prime example of what can happen. People now quote it as true yet it has many mistakes as anyone with an interest in something can spot. I will sometimes correct a mistake I come across there but it is a lifetime's job for someone. The people who run it clearly are more interested in nice looking articles (wikified) than accuracy and within reason, anyone can write anything they want there.
Nov 13th, 2006, 06:05 AM
#18
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,801
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the thing to be aware of on Fodor's is that courtesy inhibits some negative comments regarding other people's rave reviews. I think the courtesy that dominates Fodor's is fantastic and shouldn't be changed, but I have the feeling I'm not alone in letting it pass when someone gives a rave review to a restaurant, hotel or destination that I would rate so-so or very touristy or worse. I'm sure some people think I'm already way too contrary, but I tend to only be that way about destinations. When it comes to restaurants or attractions, I often feel like I'd be spoiling somebody else's fond memories if stepped in to post anything other than offer an alternative suggestion.
Extremely negative posts do, as Ira says, instantly draw "troll" suspicion. And that's telling. I think the Fodor's board is best understood as a place to come for positive ideas and reinforcement that travel is mostly a great experience, rather than a source of critical evaluation of travel services.
I think the Fodor's board works very well in its own way and wouldn't work the other way at all. But it points to the wisdom of going beyond message boards in planning a trip.
Extremely negative posts do, as Ira says, instantly draw "troll" suspicion. And that's telling. I think the Fodor's board is best understood as a place to come for positive ideas and reinforcement that travel is mostly a great experience, rather than a source of critical evaluation of travel services.
I think the Fodor's board works very well in its own way and wouldn't work the other way at all. But it points to the wisdom of going beyond message boards in planning a trip.
Nov 13th, 2006, 06:16 AM
#19
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 74,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
>Fodors are quoted in the real article as saying they're now going to pre-vet - whatever that means - "reviews" in the hotel section before publication.<
Thanks, flanner.
However, TA vets its reviews, but sneaky ones still sneak in.
I don't bother with the ratings or rankings, as it is possible to have a hotel ranked no. 1 in a city on the basis of only 1 review.
Thanks, flanner.
However, TA vets its reviews, but sneaky ones still sneak in.
I don't bother with the ratings or rankings, as it is possible to have a hotel ranked no. 1 in a city on the basis of only 1 review.
Nov 13th, 2006, 06:27 AM
#20
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 8,862
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think so. I think that TripAdvisor is a little more sophisticated than that.
And consider IMDB (the internet movies database). Rankings take number of votes into account.
Of course no system is foolproof, but these systems aren't so completely dumb either.
And consider IMDB (the internet movies database). Rankings take number of votes into account.
Of course no system is foolproof, but these systems aren't so completely dumb either.
