The eBay Weed of the Day

The eBay Weed of the Day
16 July 2009
EventHorizon1984

In the article 'TripAdvisor Warns Of Hotels Posting Fake Reviews' author Melissa Trujillo reported one company "has been quietly posting disclaimers to warn customers of hotels writing fake reviews to improve their popularity rankings or hurt competitors".

This is a common problem. As referenced in the article:

• "Apple required that consumers purchase or download an application before they can review it online in the App Store"
• "A plastic surgery company, Lifestyle Lift Inc., agreed to pay $300,000 to resolve an investigation into positive online reviews written by employees, the New York attorney general announced Tuesday"
• "travel industry insiders — but often not casual travelers — understand the financial incentives hotels have to artificially inflate their rankings on the site. Some offer discounts or freebies to patrons who write positive reviews or hire public relations companies who say they can improve the reviews"

Common and widespread to the extent that the U.S. FTC (Federal Trade Commission) wrote the FTC GUIDES CONCERNING USE OF ENDORSEMENTS AND TESTIMONIALS IN ADVERTISING in 1975 and 1980.

Very briefly that Guide requires companies to identify themselves when commenting on their products. And people making comments about a product, that a company shows to the public, must be independent of the company. Or the person or company must provide to the public their relationship.

This Federal Guide apparently is so abused that the "Federal Trade Commission is revising guidelines on testimonials and endorsements to reflect the growth of online marketing".

Which brings us to what is a "Weed"?

We use the term "Weed" to describe people paid to post. The term derives from how these individuals are viewed. For example the featured article notes, "company has policies to weed out suspicious reviews".

A Wall Street Journal poster provided a partial description of the tactics an eBay Weed employs. This edited version is similar to PowerPoint discussion points given by public relations companies to writers.

1. Blame the messenger.
2. Attack the messenger or message.
3. Downplay the message.
4. Twist what the messenger is trying to say.
5. Spin everything positive for Ebay

6. Never blame Ebay for anything
7. Tell users to go elsewhere if they don’t like it

For the Weeds that will use some of those tactics on this article, tell your supervisor to study a little history. Or actually read the various Public Relations text books. Some of us did.

Philip Morris Public Relations 1992:

• Change the focus of the issue
• Explore and exploit the opposition's weaknesses
• Investigate legal challenges to opposition efforts
• Develop alliances with other groups being attacked by the opposition
• Begin large-scale program of journalism education (focusing on accuracy, accountability, objectivity, etc.)
• Become a source of information and expertise

The above combined checklists sounds familiar doesn't it?

One persona missing from the public relations tactics is the 'friend'. A theatrical example is Security Officer Price from the film Stalag 17 (1953). This personae and it's subtypes are the hardest to detect, and we'll leave that for a future article.

Which brings us to the eBay Weed of the Day.

Disclaimer: We are commenting on individual(s) associated with the following posts, who may have attempted to influence public opinion through methods unsanctioned by the FTC. This opinion should not be taken as fact, and the reader should form their own unbiased opinion.

This part of a recent post was made on a recent article involving eBay.

• #1  "Some people just can't handle change or changing markets. A handful of people have been complaining for more than a year now (mostly the same ones on every blog they can find in a day); they need to learn to move on."

Interestingly months earlier the following comment was made on a different article by another independent voice.

• #2  "if you take out the 10 or 15 most vocal anti-eBay people blogging all over the place (sometimes with different names as well), you realize that the noise is pretty low if noticeable at all. Life goes on, adapt or die.

To be obvious:

1. "Some people just can't handle change or changing markets"
2. "adapt or die"

1. "they need to learn to move on"
2. "Life goes on"

1. "A handful of people have been complaining for more than a year now"
2. "if you take out the 10 or 15 most vocal anti-eBay people"

1. "(mostly the same ones on every blog they can find in a day)"
2. " blogging all over the place (sometimes with different names as well)"

The dissimilar writing styles 'sound' like two separate writers. Which begs the questions. Two different people stating near identical talking points months apart?  Down to the parenthesis; "(", ")"?

We leave you with this thought. Those are not the only examples.

"Sure. Fine. Whatever."
Dana Scully, X-Files (Syzygy)

//
//
//

Technorati Profile

EventHorizon1984 Blog Log

EventHorizon1984 Squidoo

Event Horizon 1984
eCRATER EventHorizon1984
Amazon EventHorizon1984