74 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}
74 {{ upvoteCount | shortNum }}

Posting Fake Reviews for SEO purposes can get you fined close to $100,000

by writeaway
63 replies
  • SEO
    • |
This is fairly standard practice in the Online Reputation Management industry. Big smackdown in court recently. See SEO Companies Fined Over Fake Reviews
#$100 #close #fake #fined #posting #purposes #reviews #seo
  • Profile picture of the author the brewer
    Wow, mind you it is about time something like this happened.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8543182].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
    I don't agree with making fake reviews of products as a form of rep management. But I disagree even more with honeypot operations to track down and convict operators. It's entrapment, and wrong in my mind.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8543346].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

      But I disagree even more with honeypot operations to track down and convict operators. It's entrapment, and wrong in my mind.
      When they offer review services in public then you can't call it an entrapment.

      If I would sell drugs on the internet I would also get caught.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8543373].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
        Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

        When they offer review services in public then you can't call it an entrapment.

        If I would sell drugs on the internet I would also get caught.
        It's just my view on it. Just not a fan of self proclaimed internet Police.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8543386].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
          Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

          It's just my view on it. Just not a fan of self proclaimed internet Police.
          I'm pretty sure the New York Attorney General's office counts as real police - Not just self proclaimed.
          Signature

          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544149].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
            Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

            I'm pretty sure the New York Attorney General's office counts as real police - Not just self proclaimed.
            The problem with that is, just because the rest of the sheep blindly hand over the policing of the web to the US government . Doesn't mean I have to.

            In law enforcement, I feel "honeypot entrapment operations" like this are wrong. There's a difference between that and a "sting operation", where a group has been under watch, with evidence gathered.

            Ignorance to the law is no excuse, I understand. But in alot of these types of operations. People who are not constantly and knowingly breaking the law get caught up, in huge mediawide scandals.

            Where's the line here? Will they start posting jobs in the Warrior for Hire looking for review writers. Or maybe start posting job offers on outsourcing websites. Popping out $10k fines on every Bogey from here to Timbuktu.
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8545746].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author PBScott
    My industry is absolutely full of this crap, my biggest competitor has 100s of review websites for their products. I would love to see them get caught.
    Signature

    If you don't look at this => Really Funny Shirts <= you missed something in life

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8543354].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author squadron
    I'm trying to work out how a "fake review" is any different to a paid celebrity endorsement.

    All this will do is add layers of deniability to reviews. It could work like this:

    1. Do a Facebook or Twitter search for people talking about the product or service.

    2. "Friend" them with an offer of cash or free product in exchange for a review.

    3. Get them to create an account on the various review sites and post a review.

    4. Rinse and repeat.
    Signature
    2020 - Another Year of Bitcoin

    Wordpress Help
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544126].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by squadron View Post

      I'm trying to work out how a "fake review" is any different to a paid celebrity endorsement.
      Easy - in that situation the fact that the celebrity is paid usually needs to be disclosed somewhere in the ad. Why all the defending kind of comments. You guys been relying on reviews? fake reviews are fraud. Its not defensible.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544160].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Moneymaker2012
    My industry is absolutely full of this crap, my biggest competitor has 100s of review websites for their products. I would love to see them get caught.
    this is pretty much happening now, I've seen some big marketers doing this to get a reputation. nothing is going to stop it.
    Signature
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544187].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author natebunger
    Finally, this is already happening. I hate fake reviews. Many people rely on reviews on the internet and many of them are given fake ones and it's just plain wrong. It's really time that this is happening. I couldn't agree more - it's not defensible.
    Signature
    ##ATTENTION##
    Do You Hate Writing Sales Copy?
    I create killer copy for squeeze pages, video scripts, email auto-responders and sales pages. Click here to see reviews.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544380].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author McGov
    Post fake "good" reviews gets you fined. Posting fake, slanderous reviews to destroy a business owner? You can get away with it and law enforcement has little interest in helping. I have a client who is being trashed by a crazy ex ... she is destroying him online and he is powerless to defend himself. Yelp and the other review sites won't help. (But they will sell him an ad)
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/te...anted=all&_r=0
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544415].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author nik0
      Banned
      Originally Posted by McGov View Post

      Post fake "good" reviews gets you fined. Posting fake, slanderous reviews to destroy a business owner? You can get away with it and law enforcement has little interest in helping. I have a client who is being trashed by a crazy ex ... she is destroying him online and he is powerless to defend himself. Yelp and the other review sites won't help. (But they will sell him an ad)
      http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/23/te...anted=all&_r=0
      He could sue the one who posts the negative reviews, as long as he can proof that it's truly fake, untruth. They have a specific word for that in the law system, forgot which one.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544978].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nik0
        Banned
        This sums up nicely why it's necessary to take action:

        "But the investigation uncovered a wide range of services buying fake reviews that could do more permanent damage: dentists, lawyers, even an ultrasound clinic."

        Perhaps you nay sayers scream differently when you end up with some horror dentist or some plastic surgeon that makes your face even worse lol

        Or more realistic, that you end up at some sleazy hotel where you paid 3 weeks in advance and a reputation of not honoring refunds.

        Anyway, I consider this whole reputation management business as a worthless thing anyway, there's always a reason why people get a bad reputation, cause they deserve it.

        When I get such requests I always go through it myself to be the judge of things, only once I accepted such job.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544991].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author bluecoyotemedia
    taxpayers money hard at work... you gotta love it
    Signature

    Skunkworks: noun. informal.

    A clandestine group operating without any external intervention or oversight. Such groups achieve significant breakthroughs rarely discussed in public because they operate "outside the box".
    https://short-stuff.com/-Mjk0fDExOA==

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544492].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author patadeperro
      Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

      It's just my view on it. Just not a fan of self proclaimed internet Police.
      The only thing you will never find on the Internet is discernement, so when people can't analyse things for themselves somebody else will glady do it for them, getting control over them in the process.

      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

      I'm pretty sure the New York Attorney General's office counts as real police - Not just self proclaimed.
      Very ethnocentric point of view, the New York Attorney Generals office means nothing to me, nor to 90% of the population in the world, so I guess this would be one of the jobs that would be outsourced to India, after all I guess they still will have some seo work to do.
      Signature
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544529].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author nik0
        Banned
        Originally Posted by patadeperro View Post

        Very ethnocentric point of view, the New York Attorney Generals office means nothing to me, nor to 90% of the population in the world
        You could figure out yourself that it's some governmental instrument.

        Who else you think they have to pay the fine too? Just some random lawyer cause he took action?
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8544975].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by patadeperro View Post

        Very ethnocentric point of view, the New York Attorney Generals office means nothing to me, nor to 90% of the population in the world,
        Pat thats just utter nonsense. The New York attorney's office didn't fine anyone in India. The piece in the OP is about companies in New York/US being fined. Your attempt to add race or ethnicity to this discussion is garbage.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8547917].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author patadeperro
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Pat thats just utter nonsense. The New York attorney's office didn't fine anyone in India. The piece in the OP is about companies in New York/US being fined. Your attempt to add race or ethnicity to this discussion is garbage.
          I don't think you really understood my comment Mike, what I was trying to say about your comment being very ethnocentric is because the NY attorneys office have o jurisdiction outside NY, let alone going to another country and when I mentioned about the SEO being done in India what I mean is that if the american businesses are being fined by this practice, you can easily avoid beinf fined by outsourcing the task to India or if you want to hurt your competition, pay for fake reviews that talks about them... and hire some SEO or reputation management company abroad like.... India....:p
          Signature
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8549843].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by patadeperro View Post

            I don't think you really understood my comment Mike, what I was trying to say about your comment being very ethnocentric is because the NY attorneys office have o jurisdiction outside NY,
            Pat you are making no sense whatsoever. I said the NY attorneys office were real police. They are - in New York. I said nothing about anywhere else. The ethnocentric view thing was just nonsense. Theres nothing ethnocentric about pointing out the New York state attorney office has police powers in handing out fines to new york based companies.

            Seriously this thread is a joke and shows what some of you are into. SEO companies making up fake reviews is fraud. People getting upset and trying to suggest workarounds and how it is unfair are just raising the question of what they are really into

            P.S. Why in the world would I want particularly to hire SEOs from India? so that they can make up fake reviews of their own service and not have to pay fines for their fraud? If anything thats a yet another reason to NOT hire an Indian SEO company (along with many of them - not all - being very very poor SEOs).
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8549987].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author patadeperro
              Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

              Pat you are making no sense whatsoever. I said the NY attorneys office were real police. They are - in New York. I said nothing about anywhere else. The ethnocentric view thing was just nonsense. Theres nothing ethnocentric about pointing out the New York state attorney office has police powers in handing out fines to new york based companies.

              Seriously this thread is a joke and shows what some of you are into. SEO companies making up fake reviews is fraud. People getting upset and trying to suggest workarounds and how it is unfair are just raising the question of what they are really into

              P.S. Why in the world would I want particularly to hire SEOs from India? so that they can make up fake reviews of their own service and not have to pay fines for their fraud? If anything thats a yet another reason to NOT hire an Indian SEO company (along with many of them - not all - being very very poor SEOs).
              You and so many others here are missing my entire point, context is what you (and the others need)... see how everything started with me agreeing with Kevin about the idea of some people policing the internet.

              I am not saying the NY attorney is not a real police or not, the thing I am criticizing is that a local government are trying to control something of a global scale, I am not justifying fraud nor endorsing wrong SEO or business practices.

              I you read the comment on my first post says "Discernment is the only thing you will never find online"... if you base your decision merely on an online review... it is your fault!!, not the business owner, not the guy who did the fake review.... again I am not endorsing this practice nor saying it should exist I am just saying you need to be aware of it and take EVERYTHING with a grain of salt, you need to exercise your own judgement.... no amount of police or judges or external auditors will replace your own judgement and critical thinking.

              To me the government of ANY county wanting to control something international or global is absolutely ludicrous... it is like when countries raise their taxes... what happens next is that businesses open offices offshore to avoid those taxes... I am just justifying nor saying it is a good practices.... what I am saying is that trying to play this type of game in an open world is simply naive to say the least.... no amount of government, regulations or cops can replace critical thinking and good judgement.

              If all of you think that I am endorsing or I am related with bad SEO practices... read all my comments again, see the context... and exercise your own judgement... or send me the NY attorney to fine me for endorsing wrong doing...:p

              Respectfully
              patadeperro
              Signature
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550090].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by patadeperro View Post

                I am not saying the NY attorney is not a real police or not, the thing I am criticizing is that a local government are trying to control something of a global scale, I am not justifying fraud nor endorsing wrong SEO or business practices.
                You continue to make no sense whatsoever. The NY attorneys office did not attempt to control something on a global scale. They fined companies within their own jurisdiction. Did they fine anyone in India? a little logic please? Just a little bit?


                if you base your decision merely on an online review... it is your fault!!, not the business owner, not the guy who did the fake review
                Pure Crap and yes by placing the blame away from the person perpetuating the fraud and on to those who are fooled by it you ARE defending the FRAUD. You can claim you do not endorse it but in fact you very much are by placing all the fault on the end user. This has nothing to do with judgment or critical thinking (which you are not showing). That always needs to be exercised but the fact that it has to be exercised in no shape or form excuses fraud. When you distill your weak logic here it essentially argues there ought to be no laws whatsoever against fraud of any kind because "judgement" needs to be exercised. The claim of trying to control the global internet is silly once we realize that the NY attoney's office made no global attempt whatsoever. You basically just made that up as a strawman.

                Readers Please mark the people defending the right to make up false reviews and stay away. There has to be a reason they are trying to spin this into something unusual or wrong. Sheesh this is why Internet marketers have such a scuzzy reputation.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550235].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                  Here for all of you trying to make ridiculous claims.

                  A.G. Schneiderman Announces Agreement With 19 Companies To Stop Writing Fake Online Reviews And Pay More Than $350,000 In Fines | Eric T. Schneiderman

                  Posing as the owner of a yogurt shop in Brooklyn, representatives from Attorney General Schneiderman's office called the leading SEO companies in New York to request assistance in combating negative reviews on consumer-review websites. During these calls, representatives from some of these companies offered to write fake reviews of the yogurt shop and post them on consumer-review websites such as Yelp.com, Google Local and Citysearch.com, as part of their reputation management services.

                  The investigation revealed that SEO companies were using advanced IP spoofing techniques to hide their identities, as well as setting up hundreds of bogus online profiles on consumer review websites to post the reviews.
                  Read the bold part over again and stop the silly charge that anyone was trying to regulate the global internet. They did what what was in their jurisdiction to do - IN NEW YORK. :rolleyes:
                  Signature

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550248].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author paulgl
                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  Readers Please mark the people defending the right to make up false reviews and stay away.
                  Had to quote that so it stands out.

                  Paul
                  Signature

                  If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550249].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author patadeperro
                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  You continue to make no sense whatsoever. The NY attorneys office did not attempt to control something on a global scale. They fined companies within their own jurisdiction. Did they fine anyone in India? a little logic please? Just a little bit?




                  Pure Crap and yes by placing the blame away from the person perpetuating the fraud and on to those who are fooled by it you ARE defending the FRAUD. You can claim you do not endorse it but in fact you very much are by placing all the fault on the end user. This has nothing to do with judgment or critical thinking (which you are not showing). That always needs to be exercised but the fact that it has to be exercised in no shape or form excuses fraud. When you distill your weak logic here it essentially argues there ought to be no laws whatsoever against fraud of any kind because "judgement" needs to be exercised. The claim of trying to control the global internet is silly once we realize that the NY attoney's office made no global attempt whatsoever. You basically just made that up as a strawman.

                  Readers Please mark the people defending the right to make up false reviews and stay away. There has to be a reason they are trying to spin this into something unusual or wrong. Sheesh this is why Internet marketers have such a scuzzy reputation.
                  Yes they are fining local companies, but it is very naive to think this will solve the issue, this is the site they gave as reference:

                  hxxp://www.ag.ny.gov/press-release/ag-schneiderman-announces-agreement-19-companies-stop-writing-fake-online-reviews-and

                  And this is part of the link:



                  And no, I am not defending fraud, I am blaming the companies that use this business practices as well as the naive people that will take those reviews as a decisive element to buy something, you may see the world like black or white... but I don't... both are to blame and no government, local police or regulation will substitute your judgement.

                  I don't condone the fraud, I don't condone the lack of judgement on the people that just rely on those reviews and I don't condone the idea that we need someone to patrol the internet.

                  Respectfully
                  patadeperro
                  Signature
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550262].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                    sorry Pat we already have you on record stating its not the fault of the person writing the fraud review. :rolleyes: You can try and spin your way out of it but you said it. The fact that the article mentions they used articles written by people outside the US means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Your very quote indicates thwy held the companies IN NEW YORK responsible and no one else.

                    Sure it goes toward solving the problem - in New York. There are now 19 of the top SEO companies in New York that won't be doing fake reviews any time soon. Since the point was to curtail fraud in NEW YORK that goes a long way toward improvement.

                    I'm just tired of the crap logic that because its the Internet the law should leave you alone to lie, perpetuate fraud and ripoff people. Also tired of people in other countries whining about US agencies enforcing laws in their own country. don't like it - just cut off connecting to our market. You can have the whole global internet without getting dollars from the US market.
                    Signature

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550299].message }}
                    • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
                      Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                      sorry Pat we already have you on record stating its not the fault of the person writing the fraud review. :rolleyes: You can try and spin your way out of it but you said it. The fact that the article mentions they used articles written by people outside the US means ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Your very quote indicates thwy held the companies IN NEW YORK responsible and no one else.

                      Sure it goes toward solving the problem - in New York. There are now 19 of the top SEO companies in New York that won't be doing fake reviews any time soon. Since the point was to curtail fraud in NEW YORK that goes a long way toward improvement.

                      I'm just tired of the crap logic that because its the Internet the law should leave you alone to lie, perpetuate fraud and ripoff people. Also tired of people in other countries whining about US agencies enforcing laws in their own country. don't like it - just cut off connecting to our market. You can have the whole global internet without getting dollars from the US market.
                      Are you having your period?
                      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550360].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Bent SEO
    Still doesn't stop people from doing reviews of reviews, loophole a lot of people use to get around the law.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8545002].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author netanel23
    Its the same thing in every niche, the only thing that is different is the size and scope of the companies. Or in this case a huge push for NY based SEO service providers.

    My guess without looking into it too much is these companies were scams, just like many seo companies out there that dont have a clue of what they are doing and deserve the fines.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8545976].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SEODollz
    Exactly. Where is the line drawn? Especially with SEO... You could make a case that being #1 for a search query in Google is a kind of endorsement. So if the number one dentist in my local dentist SERP turns out to be a fraud should Google be held responsible? Noooo just like the "blameless" review sites they won't be facing criminal charges but what about the company that SEO'd that dentist to the top?

    I've always had the rule that I don't work with garbage companies. I won't put lipstick on a pig, if I think someone is running their business poorly or has a subpar product or service I won't do business with them.

    That said, Online Reputation Management in my opinion is first and foremost a proactive strategy. I want my client to have a ton of feel good press in place online so that if something not great happens that little drop of bad press will roll off their back. But what about bad stuff that happens to good companies? Because it does. Cutthroat competitors will try to sink a company by unethical means. Review sites are no help, take Yelp: why do they have a "vote as funny" button on their reviews? This shows the absolute lack of respect for the livelihoods that are at stake for the small businesses involved.

    I read a review on Yelp the other day that made my stomach churn... a woman gave a restaurant a one star review after admitting that the food and the service were great, so why the one star? There was nothing on their dessert menu that she could eat because (WAIT FOR IT) she has a dairy allergy. Really? Seriously?

    And that review stuck, not only on the restaurant's profile page where hopefully people will disregard it as completely ludicrous but that one star brings down their total star rating which can affect where they show up on Yelp's internal search as well as whether their restaurant will show up in the description of the Yelp search results page that will show up on many Google SERPs for the various keywords that apply to that restaurant. That is lost traffic, lost money because this woman is high off of consumer entitlement fumes.

    This is serious business for real small businesses. I wrote a little post about Yelp if anyone is interested but apparently my link was removed so I can't help you.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8546185].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author paulgl
    I think people are missing the bigger picture. It's not anything against
    SEO. It's about fraud. Pure and simple. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Just because these people were into SEO is beside the point.

    Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. That's it.

    Selling fake SEO is the same as selling fake watches. Pure and simple.

    I have no idea why people cannot accept it at face value instead of
    reading into stuff that does not exist.

    Sadly, it seems the lot of you are just into fake SEO. Go figure.
    One reason why I have a beef with plenty of you.

    This really has nothing to do with SEO. It's about fraud.

    Paul
    Signature

    If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8546230].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
      Originally Posted by paulgl View Post

      I think people are missing the bigger picture. It's not anything against
      SEO. It's about fraud. Pure and simple. Nothing more, nothing less.
      Just because these people were into SEO is beside the point.

      Fraud. Fraud. Fraud. That's it.

      Selling fake SEO is the same as selling fake watches. Pure and simple.

      I have no idea why people cannot accept it at face value instead of
      reading into stuff that does not exist.

      Sadly, it seems the lot of you are just into fake SEO. Go figure.
      One reason why I have a beef with plenty of you.

      This really has nothing to do with SEO. It's about fraud.

      Paul
      Oh yeah screwem. They where prob set up like Turkeys before hand anyway. And I was a little off topic, but I don't get out a lot.

      Need a bun for your beef?
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8547291].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SEODollz
    Paul what are you referring to as "fake SEO"? Serious question, curious.

    My point was that this bust sets a precedent for online marketers facing criminal charges based on the popular offline concept of "Truth in Advertising." In theory I'm for it but I think the way they are going about it is not the most effective route and leaves the door open to witch hunts.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8546244].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      I'm just happy that SEOdollz is alive. I thought she went to Mehico, made a video cursing a cartel guy, took a siesta and was pushing up guacomoles south of the border.
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8546393].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulgl
      Originally Posted by SEODollz View Post

      Paul what are you referring to as "fake SEO"? Serious question, curious.
      That seriously cannot be a serious question.

      Paul
      Signature

      If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8546449].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author SEODollz
        Originally Posted by paulgl View Post

        That seriously cannot be a serious question.

        Paul
        Sure it is. Do you mean fake SEO as in SEO that doesn't actually rank you or do you mean fake SEO as in .... ? There are a lot of not so ethical techniqes that can rank you in the short term, is that fake SEO?

        Posting reviews on review sites isn't really any kind of SEO unless you are doing it for backlinks or because you are trying to rank within the review site's internal search pages. OR unless you are trying to rank first in the internal SERPs so you can appear in the description of a results page that appears within a Google SERP. hehehe
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8546475].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SEODollz
    Wow that's the first time I've EVER dropped a link here and I got spanked. Ouch. I was linking to an informational article that I wrote and that was applicable, and I disclosed the fact that I wrote it. Wasn't trying to sell anything. What's the deal? Or am I supposed to no follow it?

    Sup Mike I thought you knew the cartel is no match for me
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8546454].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    You guys with your fake Youtube views & fake FB Likes are next. :p
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8549994].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author paulgl
      Originally Posted by yukon View Post

      You guys with your fake Youtube views & fake FB Likes are next. :p
      I wish. Responses in this thread are why SEO has such a bad reputation in
      some parts...

      If you walked into a steak house, ordered Kobe beef, as it was labeled on
      the menu, then realized it came from Florida, I assume nobody here would
      give them a pass. But SEO? Sure, why not? It's the nature of the biz...

      People just got busted for selling fake honey. That is, faking the country
      of origin. Largest food fraud ever in US history...

      Don't the feds have better things to do than bust honey importers?

      It's FRAUD people. FRAUD. But at least we know where some of you stand.
      With the bottom feeders.

      Paul
      Signature

      If you were disappointed in your results today, lower your standards tomorrow.

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550024].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
    Here's my problem. As clear as I can.

    Cause no harm, loss or injury. 3 basic principles.

    Who was the complainant?

    Cases like this usually come with an agenda. Media attention created nicely. And laws soon follow after landmark case rulings. I asked where will the line be drawn?

    The way I see it, this will roll out into every piece of content online with the word "review" in it. Maybe they won't be sending fines out to Bangledesh just yet. But you can be sure they will start seeing site and hosting suspensions night and day.

    I don't know really. I just see a lot of really small fish getting deep fried with shit like this.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550324].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
      Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

      Cases like this usually come with an agenda. Media attention created nicely. And laws soon follow after landmark case rulings. I asked where will the line be drawn?
      At Fraud?......ooooh how bad would that be?
      Signature

      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550352].message }}
    • Profile picture of the author yukon
      Banned
      Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

      Here's my problem. As clear as I can.

      Cause no harm, loss or injury. 3 basic principles.

      Who was the complainant?

      Cases like this usually come with an agenda. Media attention created nicely. And laws soon follow after landmark case rulings. I asked where will the line be drawn?

      The way I see it, this will roll out into every piece of content online with the word "review" in it. Maybe they won't be sending fines out to Bangledesh just yet. But you can be sure they will start seeing site and hosting suspensions night and day.

      I don't know really. I just see a lot of really small fish getting deep fried with shit like this.
      Your making false claims in your forum sig., I know it's supposed to be humor, still it's a false claim. Mike A. is using a Matt C. image in his forum sig. that he has no rights to use & for profit.

      Looks like potential trouble to me.
      {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550358].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        Your making false claims in your forum sig., I know it's supposed to be humor, still it's a false claim. Mike A. is using a Matt C. image in his forum sig. that he has no rights to use & for profit.

        Looks like potential trouble to me.
        Dunno what your talking about.
        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550377].message }}
      • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
        Originally Posted by yukon View Post

        Your making false claims in your forum sig., I know it's supposed to be humor, still it's a false claim. Mike A. is using a Matt C. image in his forum sig. that he has no rights to use & for profit.

        Looks like potential trouble to me.
        Yo Yuke don't leave yourself out bro. We both know back a few years back you were pimping by PM an info pack on how to fake being a wikipedia reviewer in order to give yourself a link.

        ah the good ole days

        don't worry I will be changing sigs soon. Might go with Sergey next. I am moving on up.

        Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

        Are you having your period?
        so thats what you tell the GF every time you are losing an argument and can't make a good counterpoint.
        Signature

        {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550379].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author yukon
          Banned
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Yo Yuke don't leave yourself out bro. We both know back a few years back you were pimping by PM an info pack on how to fake being a wikipedia reviewer in order to give yourself a link.

          ah the good ole days

          don't worry I will be changing sigs soon. Might go with Sergey next. I am moving on up.
          I never told anyone to fake review Wikipedia.

          Matter of fact what I did (and can still do today) Wikipedia literally asked for the help, most people just don't know where to look to get the free links.

          BTW, my links are still live on Wikipedia, years later.

          I hear you about the forum sig., probably has nothing to do with the OP article or NSA, lmao.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550427].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author nik0
            Banned
            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550442].message }}
        • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
          Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

          Yo Yuke don't leave yourself out bro. We both know back a few years back you were pimping by PM an info pack on how to fake being a wikipedia reviewer in order to give yourself a link.

          ah the good ole days

          don't worry I will be changing sigs soon. Might go with Sergey next. I am moving on up.



          so thats what you tell the GF every time you are losing an argument and can't make a good counterpoint.
          Reviews are also used for branding. And the buyer perception of whos giving the review. And most of all, what the intentions of the review are.

          9/10 Dentists do not agree
          8/10 Cats do not prefer
          4/5 Dogs do not prefer

          Now these boys didnt pick a bunch of fake review providers out of a hat. They targeted "SEO companies", so that should raise alarm bells. This is our Industry, and we have the NY attorneys office running entrapment operations on us. Thats not worrying to anyone?

          As Yukon funnily pointed out, what exactly will count as a review.
          A review is a negative or positive endorsement or something?
          A statement about a product?
          An anchor text saying "join this site and make $10k a month"?

          Mike, Dont try wash your sheets white with me. Off-site SEO is based around giving what can only be described as "fake citation" back to brands and websites that otherwise would not naturally rank well in search engines. You operate PBN on this exact principle.

          This is the path I see such laws and rulings expanding into.
          {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550462].message }}
          • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
            Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post


            Mike, Dont try wash your sheets white with me. Off-site SEO is based around giving what can only be described as "fake citation" back to brands and websites that otherwise would not naturally rank well in search engines. You operate PBN on this exact principle.
            Rubbish. You guys will twist logic into a pretzel to skip away from what fraud is. I have my sites and I link to who I want to. Just like the disney company does with its various websites linking to its other websites. Linking does not make up a fake person with a fake testimonial to bamboozle the public. The most a PBN will do is make a site rank higher in the search engine not make deceptive claims. same goes for buying links or even getting the top three slots in PPC. None of that is fraud. Try again.

            You guys are desperate to defend outright fraud. Like I said everyone should draw a circle around people trying to defend this and avoid them.
            Signature

            {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550500].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
              Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

              Rubbish. You guys will twist logic into a pretzel to skip away from what fraud is. I have my sites and I link to who I want to. Just like the disney company does with its various websites linking to its other websites. Linking does not make up a fake person with a fake testimonial to bamboozle the public. The most a PBN will do is make a site rank higher in the search engine not make deceptive claims. same goes for buying links or even getting the top three slots in PPC. None of that is fraud. Try again.

              You guys are desperate to defend outright fraud. Like I said everyone should draw a circle around people trying to defend this and avoid them.
              I'm defending my industry from the scrutiny of a self appointed internet police. Whose real agenda has nothing to do with making the internet a more honest place.

              Will tweeting "Coca-Cola sucks" become a crime unless I attach my sales receipt?

              Does this class as buying fake reviews?


              http://washingtonexaminer.com/state-...rticle/2532629
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550522].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                No you are junking up my industry by begging that no laws govern what you do. thankfully marketers such as yourself are the last people the public or legislature will listen to. They get my vote and most of the public's vote to take down more fraud in more states. You can't defend squat. There are laws against fraud on the books and your state is free to apply them to your SEO. live with it because whining on WF isn't going to change anything

                Does this class as buying fake reviews?
                do you even read the articles you try and twist to your point? I see nothing where they bought the likes (which is why the phrase is in quotes) but that they advertised to get the likes. You guys always try that nonsense to try and get off from fraud. Its the old - these guys do this so I should be allowed to do that. If they bought likes for cash or made up people to fake likes then they would be wrong as well - wouldn't do a thing to let you off the hook for being wrong.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550537].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Kevin Maguire
                  Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                  No you are junking up my industry by begging that no laws govern what you do. thankfully marketers such as yourself are the last people the public or legislature will listen to. They get my vote and most of the public's vote to take down more fraud in more states. You can't defend squat. There are laws against fraud on the books and your state is free to apply them to your SEO. live with it because whining on WF isn't going to change anything



                  do you even read the articles you try and twist to your point? I see nothing where they bought the likes (which is why the phrase is in quotes) but that they advertised to get the likes. You guys always try that nonsense to try and get off from fraud. Its the old - these guys do this so I should be allowed to do that. If they bought likes for cash or made up people to fake likes then they would be wrong as well - wouldn't do a thing to let you off the hook for being wrong.
                  Buying fans it said. I would see one and the same. I never defended the fraud. I said if they broke the law screwem. My concern was the industry they targeted with their majestic fraud witch hunt. And how they went about catching people.

                  And if its fraud they're after. They should hang around Wall street. There is something much bigger going on beneath the surface of the story. In my opinion.
                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550594].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                    Dude seriously - read

                    "Many in the bureau criticize the advertising campaigns as 'buying fans' who may have once clicked on an ad or 'liked' a photo but have no real interest in the topic and have never engaged further," the inspector general reported.
                    When a phrase is in quotes make note of it. It was an advertising campaign that brought in the likes not the direct buying of likes.

                    Still makes no point at all against cracking down on fraud. If they even had it would mean they were guilty of fraud too not that any one should ease off SEO company fraud. Whats funny as can be is you say if the broke the law "screw em" but if SEO companies do the same thing then you whine about it being a witch hunt

                    like talking out of both sides of your mouth But hey you have a good night. I am done here for now.
                    Signature

                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550628].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author nik0
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Kevin Maguire View Post

                    Buying fans it said.
                    Lol come on, you believe every head line you read.

                    If there is anything that you can't trust it are newspapers and tabloid head lines lol.

                    They use facebook paid ad campaigns, completely legit, and the system is setup in such way that it results in likes. Perhaps we should sue Facebook to change their advertising concept as only they are to blame that it results in likes.

                    Those employees are totally retarded if you ask me.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550943].message }}
            • Profile picture of the author Ben Acharyaa
              Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

              Rubbish. You guys will twist logic into a pretzel to skip away from what fraud is. I have my sites and I link to who I want to. Just like the disney company does with its various websites linking to its other websites. Linking does not make up a fake person with a fake testimonial to bamboozle the public. The most a PBN will do is make a site rank higher in the search engine not make deceptive claims. same goes for buying links or even getting the top three slots in PPC. None of that is fraud. Try again.
              Not that i care but how is PBN any different? posting fake reviews gives consumers an idea about a company that may be true or may be not. we dont exactly know. A PBN likewise gets a site on the first position but the consumers/google users dont exactly know if its really the best out there. say some dentist got into the first position by building his own PBN(himself or maybe hired an SEO). that dentist didnt reach the first position based on the quality of work he offers, did he? Now google wants to rank websites based on the quality of work they offer(provide better service, attract people to link to you and get ranked.) But he manipulated the SERP and got the first position while the other good dentists stay behind. shall we fine the SEO guy here?

              Lets just imagine a scenario where a guy is pissed that he's not ranking(local business) and reports to the attorney general's office that his competitor is doing all sort of unethical things like building a PBN to rank well in the SERP. No offence but the next to be fined could be you Mike.

              I'm not trying to defend those who have paid others to get reviews, i personally have made my mind about things reading online reviews in the past and it sucks when things dont turn out the way i expected. all i'm saying is we live in glass houses.
              {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550652].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author nik0
                Banned
                Originally Posted by Ben Acharyaa View Post

                Not that i care but how is PBN any different? posting fake reviews gives consumers an idea about a company that may be true or may be not. we dont exactly know. A PBN likewise gets a site on the first position but the consumers/google users dont exactly know if its really the best out there. say some dentist got into the first position by building his own PBN(himself or maybe hired an SEO). that dentist didnt reach the first position based on the quality of work he offers, did he? Now google wants to rank websites based on the quality of work they offer(provide better service, attract people to link to you and get ranked.) But he manipulated the SERP and got the first position while the other good dentists stay behind. shall we fine the SEO guy here?

                Lets just imagine a scenario where a guy is pissed that he's not ranking(local business) and reports to the attorney general's office that his competitor is doing all sort of unethical things like building a PBN to rank well in the SERP. No offence but the next to be fined could be you Mike.

                I'm not trying to defend those who have paid others to get reviews, i personally have made my mind about things reading online reviews in the past and it sucks when things dont turn out the way i expected. all i'm saying is we live in glass houses.
                I keep it real short:

                Back then we had the yellow pages, I could buy an ad there on top for extra money same as getting a top position in Google.

                You can't compare that to fake reviews.

                Besides Google doesn't claim anywhere that they put the best businesses on top. That's why there are reviews so people can do their own research.

                But now the reviews get faked, YAIKS.

                Rankings are never achieved by quality of work, it's based on a computer algorithm

                Only for local listings some rank better when they more positive reviews but those search results look clearly different then the rest, with those letters in front. I can't imagine that anyone would be that stupid to think that Google would rank the "best dentists" or "best electricians" at the top.
                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550936].message }}
                • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                  Originally Posted by nik0 View Post

                  I keep it real short:

                  Back then we had the yellow pages, I could buy an ad there on top for extra money same as getting a top position in Google.

                  You can't compare that to fake reviews.

                  .
                  But they will Nik. They will come up with any stupid comparison to try and make their excuse for fraud stick. So now if your site appears higher in the search engines its the same as a guy stating he was cured from cancer by drinking special water from New Jersey (false testimonial). They can't figure out in their minds that fraud is a violation of laws and grey hat SEO is a violation of Google's rules (neither immoral or illegal since a company does not get to set either laws or ethics).

                  Worse they are silly enough to now suggest that the attorney general will prosecute anyone for violating Google's directions on who you can link to from where as if Google now sets laws. This is why I hope the government and Google keeps slapping Internet marketers silly. Raise the bar and clean up our industry. Get more people who can think and not come up with all these ridiculous excuses to keep the bar low so that anything goes.
                  Signature

                  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8551528].message }}
                  • Profile picture of the author nik0
                    Banned
                    Originally Posted by Mike Anthony View Post

                    But they will Nik.
                    As long as it doesn't fit in any one streets then they always try to make up reasons why it's unethical or bad.

                    Typical human behavior.
                    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8551641].message }}
              • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
                Originally Posted by Ben Acharyaa View Post


                Lets just imagine a scenario where a guy is pissed that he's not ranking(local business) and reports to the attorney general's office that his competitor is doing all sort of unethical things like building a PBN to rank well in the SERP. No offence but the next to be fined could be you Mike.
                Dude seriously think for once. whats unethical about building a PBN? You are drinking the google kool aid that they get to determine what is immoral or unethical. No?

                Then name me a single offline scenario where a company cannot buy other companies going out of business and leverage their assets? It happens all the time and its called good and ethical business. A company will buy another company for its physical, monetary, advertising, license assets. They will buy or partner with another company that has advertising contracts and allows them to enter markets. So why does it change online?

                I proudly buy domains that have advertising assets called links that I use to leverage advertising for their sister companies and or partners/clients. My property and my links. What law or ethics makes Google able to tell me what I can link or advertise on my own site? IF they don't like what it does to their serps then they can change their serps not demand I change my site

                Go ahead before you say oh come on without addressing the issue. Tell me a single solitary offline company that buys companies going out of business for their various assets that is doing anything unethical. In fact offline this is considered smart and savvy business.

                No you are all under the Google spell that a large corporation gets to determine ethics which is in itself an unethical proposition because no company operating for dollars and outright selling the top three spots should ever be able to have that power. You have all been suckered and brainwashed by the Google Public relations machine. You keep waiting for the AG to come after PBNs. It will never happen because Google is not the AG and the AG does not work for Google. Besides they would have to go after Google customers first who outright buy the top three slots which forever destroys your argument that positioning on the page indicates who is best or implies any kind of testimonial.

                With all the Public rental seo networks taken down by google ever seen the law get involved? Did google sue BMR and have the AG fine them? Why was that? If you think you might just figure out the answer.
                Signature

                {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8551575].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author SEODollz
    Where is the accountability for the review sites? I have a client that has a competitor that is posting fake negative reviews on my client's business page on Yelp. We have documented evidence that the claims made in these fake reviews are false, beyond a shadow of a doubt as they refer to services that my client doesn't even offer (and never has.) We contacted Yelp, made our case and asked for the reviews to be removed. No response, whatsoever.

    So now my small business owner will have to lawyer up and go to court to get them removed. Seems fair.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550346].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author johnsmith789
    I agree. I would also like to add some point is some companies force SEO companies to post fake reviews. And breaks SERP rules. But comparing quality they are zero. This is really a positive step and hopefully Google accept this.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550794].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author yukon
    Banned
    For the guys that aren't from the US, here's how stupid things like Gov buying FB Likes happens. Gov will have multiple bills that they're trying to pass, they throw in a bunch of useless overpriced $hit in exchange for passing a single important bill. I'm sure the FB Like budget was a $hit bill thrown in to pas a legit bill. It's not uncommon.
    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8550962].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author Mike Anthony
    Originally Posted by rettalking View Post

    It's just my view on it. Just not a fan of self proclaimed internet Police.
    Once again IMers. The Attorney General's Office is NOT self proclaimed :rolleyes:. They are appointed with real police powers to regulate ANY illegalities in their state.
    Signature

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8551598].message }}
  • Profile picture of the author NewParadigm
    just put in the fine print on your site, "some or all may be paid endorsements"
    Signature

    In a moment of decision the best thing you can do is the right thing. The worst thing you can do is nothing. ~ Theodore Roosevelt

    {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[8552564].message }}

Trending Topics