Read Michael Davis's first installment on the issue of fake online reviews, "Fake online reviews: Are you a victim?"
You may be astounded to learn that in its initial week of operation, the new neighborhood dental clinic acquired hundreds of five-star online reviews. How can that be possible—is the game rigged? The answer is, yes!
Savvy dental businesspeople now often turn to firms that specialize in enhancing online reputations or repairing damaged reputations. Many of these companies operate transparently and offer legitimate advice and service. But the ones to watch for are those that are proficient at misrepresentations and deception. They routinely violate consumer protection laws, but statute enforcement is abysmal.
Ninety-one percent of the public regularly or occasionally reads online reviews, and 84% trusts an online review as much as a personal recommendation. Further, 68% form an opinion after reading between one and six reviews.1
Kathryn “Kay” Dean, a former special agent with the US Department of Education, Office of Inspector General, is the founder of Fake Review Watch. Dean has specifically investigated and documented a plethora of fake online dental reviews. She has detailed fiscal motivations of dishonesty by the various big tech platforms, including Google, Yelp, Facebook, and more.
Dean’s most recent YouTube presentation details the fake online reviews of a California dentist who is currently under investigation by the California Board of Dentistry for gross negligence. The doctor enjoys hundreds of five-star online reviews, yet the reviews are often very dubious. Some can be tracked to the same alleged patient reviewer, who left verbatim reviews for multiple dentists. Other reviews are so nebulous that it’s doubtful the alleged patient even saw the doctor.
Some of those reviewing this California dentist posted online ads offering to post favorable business reviews in exchange for money. In fact, some “reviewers” are professional entities (often offshore companies) that generate income by producing fake online reviews. Multiple different “patients” post the same or nearly identical text and work together for the same reviewing company.
Dean cites potential conflicts of interest with bogus Google, Facebook, and Yelp reviews from people involved with Facebook review exchange groups. The networking and collusion with phony online reviews is highly revealing but is just the tip of an iceberg that has a much larger underground industry.
Is anything being done?
Dean acknowledges that tech platforms occasionally catch some fake reviews, but other reviews posted within days of each other with the exact same text are validated as five-star reviews. Dean believes these are placed by marketing services. She details how legitimate negative one-star reviews are removed by the tech platforms for “violating terms of service.” These critical reviews are not counted in a doctor’s rating and are not easily accessible to online readers.
I asked Dean about the extent and manner in which social media platforms are complicit in the fraud of fake dental online reviews. “Companies such as Google and Yelp are complicit in that they do too little to clean up the fraudulent reviews on their platforms,” she said. “I've found thousands of businesses, including dentists, with fake Google and Yelp reviews. I'm just one person, so if I can find this much fraud, certainly these tech companies can.
“Furthermore, when Google occasionally does remove fake reviews, I've never seen them inform consumers about their actions,” Dean continued. “Google just took down 178 fake reviews for a New York orthodontist who was part of a large network of businesses I investigated that are receiving fake reviews, but consumers are none the wiser; the orthodontist still has a high Google rating.
“Yelp is only marginally more transparent. When Yelp removes fake reviews, they’re placed in a difficult-to-find ‘removed for violating terms of service’ category. For example, in my recent video on a California dentist, I note that Yelp has removed more than 40 of his five-star reviews for violating their terms of service. These were fake reviews that were quietly removed by Yelp. When prospective patients check the dentist's Yelp page, they’ll see a stellar rating and no mention of the removed reviews.”
Dean commented on the established industry of online review brokers. “Review sellers can generate a lot of fake reviews in a short amount of time; I've seen them on Facebook advertising reviews in bulk. For example, one review broker says she has 1,000-plus domestic and international members and provides Google reviews at cheap rates. A California review seller who specializes in Yelp reviews has 300-plus real Yelpers ready. Then there's the marketer with medical and dental practices as clients looking for ‘bulky review accounts on Yelp, Google, Healthgrades, WebMD, Yellow Pages, Vitals, RateMDs, and Zocdoc.’ I could go on with many more examples.”
When I asked Dean about what specific regulatory action she would like to see in the public interest, she responded with vigor. “How about any regulatory enforcement! I don't know of a single regulatory body, attorney general, or district attorney who's taking serious action to combat fake review fraud. That's the problem—there are no consequences for faking reviews. If dental boards took action to discipline a few dentists, or a few district attorneys prosecuted them for false advertising, I think this would be a substantial deterrent.”
I also asked Dean if new software could be a valuable tool in detection of fake online reviews. “I'm aware that some people are trying to develop such software, but I'm skeptical that it will be very effective. However, why should we need special software to snuff out fake reviews? The review platforms should be doing this themselves. They're not serious about it because it's not in their interests to call out businesses who are paying them advertising dollars and, moreover, they’re not held liable for fraud on their platforms. Congress needs to reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to hold these tech companies accountable.”
Finally, I asked Dean what protections the public should ask for, maybe even demand. “First, the public needs to demand that Congress reform Section 230 so that there is serious action from the tech companies themselves to clean up the fraud. Second, we need to bring pressure on the Federal Trade Commission, state attorneys general, and professional bodies such as state dental boards to start disciplining those who are obtaining fraudulent reviews. Finally, until all of that happens, the public simply needs to stop using online reviews, especially to decide anything of importance.
“There's one more entity asleep at the wheel regarding the fake review problem: the media,” Dean concluded. “The dearth of reporting on what is a massive problem affecting millions of Americans and thousands of honest businesses is shameful.”
Reference
1. Bloen C. 84 percent of people trust online reviews as much as friends. Here’s how to manage what they see. Inc. July 31, 2017. https://www.inc.com/craig-bloem/84-percent-of-people-trust-online-reviews-as-much-.html
Michael W. Davis, DDS, maintains a general dentistry practice in Santa Fe, New Mexico. He chairs his district dental society peer review committee and is involved in state dental association issues. He is also active with consultation and expert witness work for a variety of attorneys. Dr. Davis may be reached at [email protected] or on his website, smilesofsantafe.com.
