‘Tourists saying ‘no’ to user-generated opinions’ - Newsweek Reports
March 12, 2008
There are grumblings in the user generated review world. Newsweek reports that “the expert is back”, and Charlotte Beal reports that there is an increase in ‘choice fatigue’ amongst tourists, and that “the world is too dangerous a place for faulty information”. Returning from my Tips From The T-List sponsored blogger workshop at PhoCusWright@ITB, where we focussed on these issues has given me a greater appreciation for the conflict.
I have started to hear an increase in frustration with false reviews and bad information with UGC review sites like TripAdvisor. The issue is that anyone can write a review about a property even if they have not been to the property, this opens up the opportunity for abuse, and when abuse does happen, (which it does) these sites don’t remove the offending posts. (Example)
These fraudulent reviews have a ripple effect, they directly effect the slighted property, and if the false reviews are identified, they lower the credibility of the entire user generated review process. This places me in a juxtaposition, I know that independent reviews are going to offer an authentic, unbiased overview; and that expert travel reviews, in most cases, are financed by the property itself, thus completely eliminating the authenticity of the review.
What can we do? All travel companies should embrace every open review platform, get involved in the reviews and see them as a learning opportunity. If you have something to hide, then you shouldn’t be in the travel business.
How are we going to ensure the authenticity of the reviews? Can we add receipt verification / proof of purchase? Or how about a verified online ID? Where if you want to write a review, you have to have a verified ID, thus making you accountable for all that you wright. This may open the door to more spam and identity theft, but how do we make people accountable for what they write.
I believe in the democratization of content, and that when people write reviews under false pretenses or write fraudulent reviews it ruins the system for everyone. What will the future look like? I agree that there will always be a place for expert opinion and content, but that we will strengthen the user generated content until it can be authenticated and trustworthy. What do you see as the future?
| 2.5 |
Written by 
Phil · Filed Under Rants and Reviews
Comments
4 Responses to “‘Tourists saying ‘no’ to user-generated opinions’ - Newsweek Reports”
Got something to say?
Hi Phil,
I think you raise an interesting point and I guess I have two thoughts coming off it.
1) I think one of the issues with something like trip advisor is sample size. Given a sufficient number of responses, then a true picture of the experience will (probably) inevitably arise because the ‘volatility’ of extreme or malicious reviews becomes drowned out. In statistical terms, I think the extreme reviews should be considered outliers and not representative of majority opinion. Having said that, it is a tougher call when it comes to a smaller establishment with only a handful of reviews.
For me, in this situation, if the place has a handful of reviews posted by people who claim to be from different areas over a reasonable time period, then I usually feel that they are accurately reflecting their experiences without any extra agenda. In know this isn’t a foolproof approach but I make the assumption that people or groups who are ticked off tend to bombard Tripadvisor when their still angry - I don’t think they usually have the energy to wage a systematic campaign over weeks and months, pretneding to be diffeent kinds of groups in different locations.
2)Vicky is now doing some work in advance of a post at TrackingTourism.com that looks at just how similar or different Tripadvisor guest ratings are from, say, national ratings. I’m not going to steal Vicky’s thunder but suffice to say that the picture isn’t as clear cut as people think it is…
Hi Stephen,
I fully agree with sample size eliminating the the outliners, and that people have to take reviews with a grain of salt. I would also hope that there aren’t people out there with the energy to wage systematic multi-id campaigns against a property.
I was speaking with an employee of Orbitz yesterday, and they do something interesting. After a trip is booked, the customer will be emailed an ‘invite’ to submit their review. This ensures that the people reviewing the trip are people that actually went on the trip. Not a bad model. If we could have a centralized “invite system” that any OTA could use, I think there would be real power there.
I am looking forward to reading Vicky’s findings on the review comparisons.
Look at the top 10 of Google (might differ in your international results)for ‘hotel reviews’
60% of the sites are owned by either Expedia, or TUI.
Don’t you think that the reason that consumers are becoming a little edgy about using these reviews when the sites are not independent?
I disagree with the Newsweek article though, I use a selection of review sites and make my own mind up, and I don’t think Expedia would have paid £10mil for Holiday Watchdog if they were concerned.
I don’t need no expert to tell me.
Hi Darren,
I agree with you as well, I think the consumer is becoming more aware of corporate bias and the skewing of results.
Don’t you think that there should be some identification / authentication that guarantees that users of these sites have actually gone to the property / went on the trip?
It will be a pain to implement, but in my books, it would add authenticity and credibility to reviews.