In the competitive game of online commerce, retailers need to differentiate themselves and their products. However, some retailers are resorting to unethical tactics that temporarily improve their online reputation. Their efforts to beat the system, though, often come at a cost.

Some companies praise their products through anonymous reviews. Now, the hip new trend is to offer a refund to all customers in exchange for a positive write-up. As traditional advertising is quickly being replaced by online reviews and rating websites, the motivation to develop a positive online reputation is higher than ever.

Amazon and other retailers hold strict guidelines that prohibit compensation for consumer reviews. Still, the temptation to inflate ratings or falsify reviews is often too strong.

Internet Age Forced FTC to Revise Advertisement Guidelines

The FTC revised its guidelines on testimonials and endorsements in 2009. Under these guidelines, a positive review posted by an individual connected to the seller – or an individual who receives in-kind payment or cash to review a service or product – must disclose that connection between the seller and the reviewer.Aaron Kocourek

David Vladeck, the director of the FTC’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, said that companies are obligated to ensure that all advertising for their services and products is not deceptive to the consumer. He recommended that advertisers who used affiliate marketers for promotions should institute a monitoring system to verify that these affiliates are truthful in advertising.

In any event where there is “reason to believe” that this law has been violated, the FTC The complaint alone is not a ruling that the company has violated the law. The complaint simply marks the beginning of a process in which all allegations are heard – and the respondent has the opportunity to refute the charges.

The FTC works to ensure that consumers do not fall victim to deceptive, fraudulent and unfair business practice. Their mission is to provide information that will help them to recognize these practices. The FTC’s website offers free information on a wide range of consumer topics.


The following three companies felt the consequences of falsely representing their products through online reviews.


Legacy Learning Systems


A prominent retailer of guitar-lesson DVDs was forced to pay $250,000 to settle Federal Trade Commission charges that the company advertised its products using online affiliate markets who falsely portrayed themselves as independent reviewers.

The FTC filed a complaint against Legacy Learning Systems, a Nashville, Tennessee-based company, along with its owner, Lester Gabriel Smith. The complaint is part of the FTC’s efforts to crack down on advertising to American consumers that is deceptive, whether these advertisements are placed in traditional or newer media channels.

The Learn and Master Guitar program, one of the major products of Legacy Learning and Smith, is sold to customers who want to learn how to play the guitar at home using written materials and DVDs. According to the FTC’s documentation, Legacy Learning and Smith promoted their online affiliate program using “Review Ad” affiliates. These affiliated endorsed the product through blog posts, article and miscellaneous online editorial content. The endorsements appeared on the same page as hyperlinks to the Legacy Learning and Smith website. As a result, affiliates were given substantial commissions on product sales that resulted from their referrals.

The FTC charged Legacy Learning and Smith with deceptive advertisements reflected the opinions of “independent” reviewers or ordinary consumers. The company failed to disclose that these affiliates received payment for each sale they generated. According to the FTC ruling, these endorsements helped the company generate sales of more than $5 million.

Legacy Learning and Smith must pay $250,000 and meet a set of standards outlined by the FTC. The company must provide monthly reports about their affiliate marketers – and disclose that they are earning commissions on each sale. The FTC approved the complaint and the proposed agreement by a vote of 5-0.

VIP Deals

VIP Deals, which specializes in stun guns and leather cases, offered customers a partial refund on any products they purchased in exchange for glowing reviews. Three different customers told the New York Times that they were mailed a letter along with a Kindle Fire cover valued at nearly $60. Customers were only required to pay $10 plus shipping for this deal.

VIP Deals, which currently doesn’t have a company website, denied the customer claims. Based on these reviews, the tactic was quite effective. Nearly 90% of the online reviews were five stars, while most of the rest were four stars.

Although VIP Deals was never officially investigated by the FTC, the public backlash to their strategy proved devastating. After the company was caught bribing, they quickly took down the negative reviews and abandoned the promotion.

Reverb Communications

The public relations firm Reverb Communications, based in California, was forced to remove fraudulent iTunes reviews that it posted for one of its clients, a  gaming app developer. Between November 2008 and May 2009, Reverb and its owner, Tracie Snitker, formed fake iTunes accounts and composed positive reviews about the clients’ apps. They did not disclose that these reviews were written by employees who worked on behalf of the app developers.

The company wrote a series of simple comments that were generally easy to detect as false and misleading to consumers. Examples include “Really Cool Game,” “Amazing new game,” and “ONE of the BEST.” Reverb claimed that the iTunes comments were from employees who downloaded the gaming apps on their own personal cell phones, with their own money. The companies involved in this ploy were not identified.

Reverb was ordered to erase the false endorsements within seven days. According to the FTC, all companies, including public relations firms with online marketing services, must abide by the organization’s guiding principle of truth in advertising.

At Reputation Advocate, we encourage business owners and their employees to avoid posting any material in comment threads hosted by online retailers. Any indication that the business is involved in unethical tactics could cause an uproar from angry customers.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *