)
Don't want to miss the best from Business Standard?
On June 10, an angry blog post from a group of 25-year-olds went viral across social media. If the events stated in the post are to be believed, the anonymous author and his/her friends had a nasty experience at popular Gurgaon microbrewery Lemp Brewpub & Kitchen. In the post, the author alleged that the Lemp management refused to honour a scheme for a "Hawaiian brunch", one that was advertised on popular user-generated ratings forum Zomato, and overcharged the party for "undercooked, inedible food". The group, the author alleged, was ill-treated by Lemp's owner and the Gurgaon Police.
Within minutes, the blog was shared across Facebook, tweeted and re-tweeted on the world. Screen shots of the blog along with comments shunning Lemp were publicised across Instagram and Pinterest. Popular food bloggers and critics latched on to share their own complaints with the place. Lemp broke its silence days later, claiming it was a plot to malign the brewery: "Hundreds of likes and posts within a second of posting the content has to be the handiwork of a full-fledged digital and social media agency hired solely with a particular motive." That may or may not be true, but, a month later, the after-effects of the online tsunami are all there: a manager at the brewery admits business has taken a hit, and its former user rating of 3.5 stars on Zomato has plummeted to a "poor" 1.3.
The incident exposes the dark side of consumer empowerment through social media. It started out as a tool to aid people-to-people conversations in the virtual world, and soon became a platform for hapless and voiceless consumers to air their grievances. Next, online reviews and ratings began to play a role while buying cars and mobile phones, booking a hotel, going out to eat et cetera. Successful businesses sprang up around online reviews and ratings. Now, the rot has begun to show: user-generated ratings are being manipulated. It is being done to trash rivals and glorify one's own product or service. A brand's social media team may post positive reviews across consumer forums, only to be countered by the rival through "troll" teams whose mandate is to hijack online conversations and defame competition through inflammatory or off-topic comments. (ONLINE MANIPULATION FOR DUMMIES)
This is a trick politicians have learnt too. Earlier this week, Rajasthan Chief Minister Ashok Gehlot was accused by the opposition BJP of "buying likes" for his official Facebook page. The likes on Gehlot's Facebook page shot up from 169,077 in May to 214,639 by end of June. The steep jump was traced to Istanbul, an unusual place to host so many Gehlot followers. The Congress, Gehlot's party, has blamed BJP for manipulating the ratings. "I was very surprised to learn about my popularity in Istanbul. I have never been to Turkey. But who created the controversy is a matter of probe," Gehlot told The Indian Express.
"Buying Facebook likes is old news," believes Prasanna Singh, CEO of advertising, media and marketing portal afaqs.com. "Any digital agency worth its salt will know what the current buying rate is!" An FMCG company, when it wanted to run a digital campaign, was surprised when a public relations agency that had pitched for the business said it could guarantee as many Facebook likes as possible. Facebook's Help Centre states that while sponsored ads and articles can be used to promote a page, "buying likes" from a third party is a "scam" and can be detected by spam systems. Yet, reveals a senior corporate communications head, this is accepted behaviour; big digital agencies hire smaller outfits in far-flung locations - perhaps like Istanbul - to do their dirty work.
* * *
With no clear law to monitor and regulate online consumer forums, a user is free to post inciting comments like "Worst bank of India...Plz Stay away!!" when referring to a large private bank, or, "Just a chor company" when talking about a leading mobile services operator (both posted on www.mouthshut.com). All categories - banking, telecom, hospitality, consumer durables - are attacked in equal measure; there is no restraint, no softening of the blow. Mouthshut, one of the largest consumer-driven platforms with over 5 million registered users, with extreme reviews of products and services, recently found itself in controversy. In May, Kaar Technologies, a provider of software solutions, filed a complaint that reviews posted on the website were defamatory. Earlier in April, the Bombay High Court ruled in favour of Sharda University against some user reviews critical of it. Mouthshut had to delete the reviews.
Mouthshut founder Faisal Farooqui admits that it's difficult to constantly regulate and monitor what users are writing. "But we allow users to rate each other and create social profiles. This helps create reliability," he says. The website, he admits, has fallen prey to "fake reviews". In 2011, the compliance unit of Mouthshut sent out an internal alert - "140 POSITIVE REVIEWS PROMOTING FLIPKART.COM!" This was a staggering figure which sent alarm bells ringing at Mouthshut's Mumbai headquarters. Farooqui refrains from alleging that Flipkart posted these, saying that the reviews were "promotional" and "could have been written by anybody". Flipkart Senior Vice-president (marketing) Ravi Vora maintains that the online retailer had nothing to do with the reviews.
Such manipulations aren't rare. An author tells of his experience: within hours of his book going up for sale online, it had received two top ratings. "When I called up the publisher to share the good news," he says, "I found that the publishing house itself had posted the ratings!" Flipkart, the country's largest online bookstore, insists that for anybody to post a review he must have a verified account with the website. (It has over 9.6 million registered users across India.) While it is preferred that he/she should have bought the product - book, consumer good, electronics - and then review it, it is not a prerequisite. "We have a strict moderation process wherein our editing team approves the reviews. No user is allowed to review the same product twice." However, a publishing house can easily post a gushing review through another registered account. Vora admits that the "ratings mechanism needs to be improved."
It works the other way too. An executive who heads the digital business for a leading car company reveals: "Days before the launch of a car, even before we had allowed any test drives, a popular automobile website was flooded with negative reviews!" Stumped, the executive started tracing the IP addresses of the reviewers - they all led to its rivals. He quickly activated the brand's own social media team to "dilute" the responses and post positive reviews. The administrator of the website, it seems, turned a blind eye. In order to gauge consumer behaviour and keep a squeaky clean and strong "social image", companies hire digital solutions agencies like Blazer (part of media investment company GroupM) and Pinstorm to track online conversations about the brand. "We track the 'influencers' - popular bloggers or Facebook pages - and identify negative talk, 'messmakers' and trollers, and then report them to our clients," says GroupM spokesperson Freya Mishra. Its clients include Airtel, Uninor, Pepsi and Dominos, among others.
Companies have become proactive in controlling online damage. In case of an adverse comment online, ICICI Bank, according to a spokesperson, takes immediate action by posting an "appropriate" response online. "Simultaneously, we reach out to the concerned person offline to resolve the issue at the earliest." Samsung, in the event that rival brands troll or post negative reviews about it, reports it to the system administrator.
* * *
While defamation (both libel and slander) is a civil wrong under common law and criminal offence under Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 66A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, says Mohit Lahoty, managing associate (intellectual property & technology law practice), Luthra & Luthra Law Offices, in case of subjective reviews and ratings, it is difficult to prove falsehood - which is crucial in defamation. Section 79 of the IT Act, he explains, states that an intermediary - in this case, the website - shall not be liable for third parties' information or data hosted and made accessible by it (with the exception of claims made under the Copyright Act, 1957 or the Patents Act, 1970), provided that it does not participate or exercise control in hosting of the information or data on its website, modify the content or exercise control in transmission of the content and selection of the consumers. The Intermediary also has to follow certain guidelines, including compliance with take-down provisions, enumerated under IT (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2011.
The anonymity offered by the web can breed blackmail. "We often get complaints from restaurants that guests threaten to post a negative review on Mouthshut if they don't get a discount," says Farooqui. This is a dangerous misuse of the newly-acquired power. Extreme rants against Lemp, says Zomato co-founder Pankaj Chaddah, were expressed on Zomato through an unprecedented 830 comments in less than ten hours. "We had to drop the rating on the basis of user votes."
The need is to secure ratings and reviews from manipulation. Chaddah says, at Zomato the opinions of credible users - the 370 "connoisseurs" registered on the website - have more weightage than others, though anyone can comment or rate a place. "One bad experience doesn't usually drop a rating," says Chaddah. The final rating across most user forums, including Mouthshut and TripAdvisor, is computed through internal algorithms that are not disclosed. But how do you separate fake from genuine? "We look at user behaviour, the frequency of comments, their IP addresses, time intervals and the ratings they give," says Chaddah. Giveaway spam comments like "I didn't go to this restaurant, but you shouldn't either" are removed. TripAdvisor country manager (India) Nikhil Ganju says the legitimacy of content is monitored through "sophisticated software and filters". Still, most sites don't have the wherewithal to check if schemes and discounts offered by restaurants are being honoured.
The service industry is where the ratings are crucial. Any customer, says Kabir Suri, promoter of Azure Hospitality which runs the Mamagoto chain of Thai restaurants, will always have extreme reactions. So an average experience will be rated as bad, he says. That's why he relies more on the customer feedback form filled by guests at the restaurant. "There is no such thing as a 100 per cent good review," he says. "Expert knowledge has been replaced by a 'wisdom of crowds' and that has led to a shift in the way in which we 'rely' on ratings and reviews," adds Nishant Shah, director (research) at Bangalore-based Centre for Internet & Society.
It's a mob at work.
