[freudling]

One big problem with the information age... the Internet... is the veracity of information. False, inaccurate information and built-in bias threatens the very nature of the information age. If the information people are reading and accessing is tainted, it becomes much less useful and wastes time.

Now there's the worry of corporate astroturfing.

Like many of you, I read reviews of products I'm interested in on sites like Amazon, Best Buy, FutureShop, and others. I also read the comments area on review articles. It's alarming... if you are convinced by some of the evidence, that some very well known companies engage in blatant corporate astroturfing. That is, having people post favourable comments and reviews on the Web in relation to their products and services. These people often times will attack anybody who is critical of said product.

I did some digging on RIM. Over at FutureShop, for instance, there are already 277 votes for the Blackberry PlayBook 16 GB model with an average 4/5 stars. There are already 28 written reviews. Many of the votes/reviews are 5 stars.

BlackBerry 16GB PlayBook with Wi-Fi : Tablets - Future Shop

Now, the BB PlayBook has been on sale for less time than the market leading iPad 2, which only has 25 votes with an average 3.7/5 star rating, with 2 written reviews.

Apple 32GB iPad 2 With WiFi - Black - In-store Only : Apple iPad - Future Shop

So, it seems like RIM is corporate astroturfing here, getting people to post positive reviews on FutureShop by the boatload.

I then found a few RIM-based articles with references to atroturfers (in the comments the astroturfers are called out):

Blackberry PlayBook: Rough Roads Ahead For RIM

I went over to disqus to check the commenter repsighifan's history of comments. Pretty much the whole lot are in fierce defence of RIM/the PlayBook, and he attacks anyone, including authors who are critical of the product.

DISQUS | repsighifan

Another article here with a commenter calling out RIM astroturfers:

Anatomy of failure: Mobile flops from RIM, Microsoft, and Nokia | Mobile Technology - InfoWorld

I realize this may not be a revelation... it's interesting to point this out though. I've noticed astroturfing more and more and it's too bad because it erodes the value of product reviews online.

Article on corporate astroturfing:

Corporate-Funded Online 'Astroturfing' Is More Advanced and More Automated Than You Might Think | | AlterNet

[turtle777]

Yes, interesting findings.

On the other hand, maybe it's because RIM is a Canadian company, so the loyal Canucks buy it and love it, although it's inferior.

-t

[freudling]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

Yes, interesting findings.

On the other hand, maybe it's because RIM is a Canadian company, so the loyal Canucks buy it and love it, although it's inferior.

-t

Ya maybe. As for me, as a Canuck, I think RIM sucks. I just laugh every time I see someone using a classic BlackBerry. It looks so outdated, yet people keep buying them. Or rather, corporations.

RIM astroturfers, where are you now?

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by freudling 

It looks so outdated, yet people keep buying them. Or rather, corporations.

It's funny how Blackberrys were the object of envy for many corporate employees.
These days, I pity people that have to use a Blackberry. iPhone FTW.

-t

[freudling]

Originally Posted by turtle777 

It's funny how Blackberrys were the object of envy for many corporate employees.
These days, I pity people that have to use a Blackberry. iPhone FTW.

-t

No doubt. I was at a Graphic Design show yesterday, and they had old tech on display. This included the first batch of Blackberrys. Seriously, they are pretty much exactly the same as the standard BlackBerry phone today. Obviously the screens are now colour with a beefed up OS, but honestly, it's hard to tell any difference LOL.

I have this big, awesome Retina Display on my iPod Touch (use it as a phone) and race through text messages and Emails with the virtual keyboard. I surf the full web, and more. Yet, people are still stuck with these pieces of sh*t. It's a miracle. I don't think, with the onslaught of amazing smartphones from companies such as Apple and HTC, that people are going to hold out much longer. It's a younger generation coming up the ranks. To me, RIM is simply living off borrowed time. It's only a matter of when they lose massive marketshare. They may still be a company moving forward, but likely not dominant like they once were.

And QNX really does seem like a cheap Chinese knock off of webOS. I see big problems for them moving forward, specially now that BB OS 7 is out, and is really no different at all from OS 6. Where's the evolution RIM?

[Doofy]

Products | What Makes Them Click

I had a read of this (Neuro Web Design) recently. All the astroturfing evil in the world, all compressed into one small book.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Products | What Makes Them Click

I had a read of this (Neuro Web Design) recently. All the astroturfing evil in the world, all compressed into one small book.

I give this book 1 star


I just astroturfed your ass.

[Doofy]

Not in the mood for your shit, Bess.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Products | What Makes Them Click

I had a read of this (Neuro Web Design) recently. All the astroturfing evil in the world, all compressed into one small book.

Book looks interesting. Are you saying it covers astroturfing? Not sure if you were being sarcastic or what. I went to Amazon and checked the reviews... lots of glowing reviews and a few really bad ones. Now, are the reviews of this book legitimate? Here we go into the new millennium. I think astroturfing is going to be the next cyberspace buzzword.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by freudling 

Book looks interesting. Are you saying it covers astroturfing?

Not specifically the backend process, but every front-end technique you'll see on sites is in there, with references to all the psychological studies backing them up. It's pure evil.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Not specifically the backend process, but every front-end technique you'll see on sites is in there, with references to all the psychological studies backing them up. It's pure evil.

Ah, I see. Cool. Ha...

The older I get the more vile marketing and image seems to be, specially from places like McDonalds.

It's like a mentor of mine said, well known in the tech industry (paraphrasing):

"It was funny, I'd be on the upper floor overhearing the marketing guys saying to potential clients: Oh sure!!! The software can do that! No problem!, said one of the marketing guys. Meanwhile, the programmers downstairs were cursing and having to work into the night. It was like a sweatshop down there. And even after all of that, it still sucked. It's all marketing. Look at Microsoft Office. It's a piece of crap but they just keep marketing the hell out of it. With Open Office and others, nobody needs to keep buying it."

[aristotles]

I'm a Canadian and I think RIM sucks. Of course I have seen the ugly side of RIM. The place where I work uses BB devices and the handsets seem to only last a few months before they have to be replaced. The build quality seems to be terrible with plastic parts that come loose or fall off.

[andi*pandi]

There are places out there with reviews that I don't trust, certainly. It would suck if companies astroturfing ruined the unbiased user review concept.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

It would suck if companies astroturfing ruined the unbiased user review concept.

They did, long ago.

[hayesk]

Bias in reviews has always existed. Astroturfing has just made it cheap. In the old days, the advertiser would just hint at reducing the amount of ads they'd put in a publication if they got a bad review.

Or just look at press junkets for movies. Don't put in a good review, don't get invited back. That's why you can tell a bad movie when the trailer proudly proclaims "Jim Genericson from ABC-Bumblef*ck, Kansas called it 'a thrill ride for the ages!'"

For online, you can tell a bad review by the number of factless, over-the-top glowing reviews. And if there's a well known issue with the product, the reviews will often acknowledge it but downplay its importance.

"This product is great. I'm aware of the 'kill your grandmother' bug, but dear old granny passed away two years ago, so it's not a concern for me. But I looooove browsing the web on this thing! It's great to wake up in the morning and start the day checking the weather and the news! I look forward to being able to try out [insert feature not released yet] here too."

[ort888]

This is really bad in the world of video games. The big game publishers manipulate the hell out of journalists to the point where a huge chunk of reviews are suspect. There is also a lot of astroturfing on message boards and comments sections.

[freudling]

Originally Posted by hayesk 

Bias in reviews has always existed. Astroturfing has just made it cheap. In the old days, the advertiser would just hint at reducing the amount of ads they'd put in a publication if they got a bad review.

Or just look at press junkets for movies. Don't put in a good review, don't get invited back. That's why you can tell a bad movie when the trailer proudly proclaims "Jim Genericson from ABC-Bumblef*ck, Kansas called it 'a thrill ride for the ages!'"

For online, you can tell a bad review by the number of factless, over-the-top glowing reviews. And if there's a well known issue with the product, the reviews will often acknowledge it but downplay it's importance.

"This product is great. I'm aware of the 'kill your grandmother' bug, but dear old granny passed away two years ago, so it's not a concern for me. But I looooove browsing the web on this thing! It's great to wake up in the morning and start the day checking the weather and the news! I look forward to being able to try out [insert feature not released yet] here too."

Well said.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by ort888 

This is really bad in the world of video games. The big game publishers manipulate the hell out of journalists to the point where a huge chunk of reviews are suspect.

I don't think that's astro-turfing. I think that's flat-out strong-arm tactics.

[BadKosh]

Astroturfing has been an advertising tool as far back as I can remember. Audio companies in the late 1960's were doing it. Pioneer, and Bose come to mind. They also had the magazines reviewers under their spell, so all those glowing reviews meant the products would still be advertised in their magazines.

[andi*pandi]

relevant link:

Leaked E-Mail Suggests Retaliation for Negative Game Review | GameLife | Wired.com

[residentEvil]

along the same lines (don't know if it is the same term being used here)...

is sites that have reviews of 4/5 or 5/5 stars for products not even released (pre orders being taken or just simply a future date posted). dozens and sometimes hundreds of reviews for how great something is, and the product has another month or two before it is in people's hands.

[andi*pandi]

Then there are stupid people who give something 5 stars just because "sounds good, im looking forward to this forever!"