Are fake and paid reviews good for the PR industry?

‘Fake reviews’. It is a phrase that unfortunately is familiar to many of us, either as PR professionals or as consumers. But how are these reviews influencing the way consumers trust traditional journalism, social media, and sites such as Trustpilot and Amazon? And can they – and should they – be used by PR professionals to enhance the profile of clients?

There’s little doubt that reviews and recommendations are critical to purchasing decisions. In fact, 19 out of 20 of us take note of reviews and recommendations before we decide to buy something.

But not any old review will do – it’s the perceived independence of the reviewer that matters. Research by software solutions company Capterra points to a much stronger level of trust in independent reviewers – people who have actually used and tested a product or service, rather than experts, or even family and friends – with 62% valuing independent online reviews versus just 21% valuing with what relatives and friends say, and only 11% trusting expert reviews.

Consumers don’t place a lot of trust in social media reviews either – and here, age plays a part. Although nearly half of 15 to 24 year olds now use social media as their source for news, compared with less than 1 in 5 of the over 40s, only 17% of this age group trust what they see on social feeds. For the over 40s, the percentage is only 11%. 

Ratings and social media are clearly in a trust vacuum – but even journalists are not always seen as ‘best in class’. The same Gallup survey reports that the national news media is trusted by 37% and 34% of consumers, and international news media by 36% and 30% respectively. There is a also a discernible gap between print and broadcast, with nearly two thirds of viewers across all ranges trusting broadcast over print.

This all suggests that consumers are becoming more savvy when it comes to fake and manipulated ratings – and it’s no wonder. The incidence of fake ratings on Trustpilot, for instance, is no secret, with the company even devising strategies to combat it. And five years ago, MIT reported that fake news on Twitter travelled faster than real news – with this unlikely to change for the better as the blue tick regime finds its way.

The good news is that according to the Ipsos Veracity survey, things are improving: the number of Britons who trust journalists has almost doubled since 2000, and interestingly, although the younger generations are considered more distrustful than the over 40s generally, they are more likely to trust journalists than are the Baby Boomer generation. The number of degree-educated people from socioeconomic groups A/B are also shown to be twice as trustful as those who do not have a degree who are from traditionally working class backgrounds.

What does this mean for the traditional PR sector? For a start, it places it in a much stronger position of trust than more recent peers, the believability of which is impacted by rumours of ‘fake’ and ‘manipulated’ reviews. And, when reviews from trusted independents are the ones that really make a difference, this trust is likely to prove crucial for relationship building and future success.

So will ‘fake and paid’ prove to be good for the PR industry? 

It looks like it could be… and not in the way that some might expect. For example, there will always be pressure to put individual clients first at every opportunity, and paid-for reviews to create a stir could, for some, be too tempting to resist. But ultimately, fake reviews are an opportunity for the sector – not to push a product, but to reinforce the professionalism and integrity that it is known for. In the age of distrust, it’s a chance to show that communications professionals can be trusted.

Peter Ibbetson is director at JournoLink, the online PR platform.