this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2024
703 points (99.6% liked)

News

23275 readers
5652 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

A federal rule banning fake online reviews is now in effect. 

The Federal Trade Commission issued the rulein August banning the sale or purchase of online reviews. The rule, which went into effect Monday, allows the agency to seek civil penalties against those who knowingly violate it.

“Fake reviews not only waste people’s time and money, but also pollute the marketplace and divert business away from honest competitors,” FTC Chair Lina Khan said about the rule in August. She added that the rule will “protect Americans from getting cheated, put businesses that unlawfully game the system on notice, and promote markets that are fair, honest, and competitive.”

(page 2) 40 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago (3 children)

Better than nothing but it also seems like it might be kind of difficult to prove the company allowed it knowingly.

[–] FPSkra 7 points 1 week ago

It prevented reviews and testimonials that misrepresent that they are by someone who does not exist. Fairly easy to prove. If they catch an individual posting a review while posing as anyone but themselves, It's a done deal.

[–] EleventhHour 3 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

In this context “knowingly” means “intentionally”, not that they knew there was a law against it.

An entity is in violation if they knowingly commit the act, not that they knowingly broke the law.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

Yes, I understand (ignorance of a law is no defense at least in the US) that but it still may prove difficult to actually prove.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Well if you take a company like Amazon they know everything about you already, including if you actually purchased the item you are reviewing. And that should be a simple first "hurdle" for a reviewer to be legit. They already have a way of sorting them out and labeling them in place. So I would assume this means if you don't have that label your review doesn't go live. They can then add more qualifiers to prove they know the reviewers are real, since this seems to put the onus of proof on the company not that FTC.

Edit - some words

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It is possible I bought the item at my local warmart though and then review it on amazon. I don't know if anyone does that, but it is possible.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago

I find that Amazon allows me to do that for good reviews, but whenever I leave a bad review for something I bought somewhere else the review disappears.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I just got a can of diet Coke in exchange for a 5-star review of a local eatery. I legit like the eatery, but would not have left a review without the bribe.

Is that a legit review or a fake one?

[–] Fedizen 2 points 1 week ago

that is fake

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I'd say that's legit given you actually like the eatery. Would you have written the review if they had just nicely asked you to, without a payment of Diet Coke?

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MehBlah 8 points 1 week ago

What is going to happen? Will the FTC police gonna come and cart them away? No, it will continue and nothing will happen. FTC enforcement is just a few law suits away from being just like the SEC's enforcement. The SEC can't enforce anything these days without a long drawn out court battle.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago
[–] [email protected] -2 points 1 week ago (2 children)
[–] citrusface 12 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's a start, we could still have nothing. FTC is doing the Lord's work right now.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Agreed.

Insofar as the Lord doesn’t actually do anything, but millions continue to fawn over him because he said maybe someday eventually he might

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Hmm, the same Lord that created all the fake reviews in the first place?

[–] citrusface 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Ledivin 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

You're right, we should just leave it as being legal 🙄 that's so much better

[–] andrewta 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Why do people do what you just did?

He says this won’t work.

And somehow you jump to “then we should just leave it as being legal”

He didn’t say we shouldn’t try something just that this might not be the best implementation.

[–] nnullzz 2 points 1 week ago

It’s bound to happen when sarcasm is met with sarcasm.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

He didn’t say we shouldn’t try something just that this might not be the best implementation.

He didn't really say anything, you're just hypothesizing a substantive argument from a low effort pessimistic gripe.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›