The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has slammed holiday-reviews site TripAdvisor, claiming it's "misleading" web users.
KwikChex Ltd and two hotels made complaints over the site's claims that it offered "trusted advice from real travellers", "reviews you can trust" and "honest travel reviews and opinions from real travellers around the world" as TripAdvisor did not check the reviews and could not prove the comments were written by genuine real travellers.
The website said it did not claim to be 100 percent fraud-free and that no reviews site could guarantee that. However, it said it uses an "advanced and highly effective fraud detection systems" which included commenters signing a declaration that their review is genuine and honest, as well as offering establishment owners the chance to respond to reviews publicly on the site. Furthermore, it said there was no practical way to verify the reviewer's identities such as by credit card or reservation details.
However, the ASA has upheld the complaint saying the claims could in fact be misleading
"Because we considered that the claims implied that consumers could be assured that all review content on the TripAdvisor site was genuine, when we understood that might not be the case, we concluded that the claims were misleading," the ASA said.
The ASA has now ordered TripAdvisor to remove all claims and statement that imply its reviews are from real travellers and are honest, real or trusted.
The regulator also told the BBC the ruling should serve as a warning to all review sites.
"This should be regarded as a benchmark ruling which applies to all web sites which make claims about the reliability of their user-created content," the ASA's spokesman Matthew Wilson told the BBC.
TripAdvisor says it has "confidence that the 50 million users who come to our site every month trust the reviews they read, which is why they keep coming back to us in increasingly larger numbers to plan and have the perfect trip".
Comments
Omendata said: Totally agree Dennis there was a documentary on it and if the sad lonely losers that were on that show are representative of the TRIPADVISOR reviewers then I am not surprised that they can put a good hotel out of business for no good reason - Its a real shame...
Dennis Martin said: I have stayed several times at a Pub/B&B in Yorkshire several times and it is an excellent place. I found it amazing that because of a down turn in business it closed but during the 12 months of closure several people apparently managed to stay there and were very critical of the service and quality. I would not trust Trip Advisor at all. There are so many brainless trolls out there who seem to regard their comments as something important, especially when they are anonymous.
Johnyboy said: I went to a lovely B&B in Suffolk and was constantly emailed by the owner to please put your views on TA as without good reviews their business was bound to suffer. Such a hold by an unaccountable website on peoples businesses is unconscionable, it needs some big guns to take it to court and be made to ask businesses whether they wish to be included as at present they have no choice and no way of protecting themselves. These government Quangos like the ASA don't seem to have any real teeth other than to make miscreants remove a few lines of text or some such, which they find some way of circumventing anyway.I did give the B&B a 5 star rating that was well deserved in the end but I did not really want to support such a website.
PigletVegas said: At last TA is being held accountable. The ASA need only to have looked at the forums on TA and the many contributers who just want to collect TA posts (some login constantly thousands of times and are awarded stars etc by TA for their "contribution") many have never been any where near the premises but comment nevertheless. These people give TA great traffic numbers and forum posts are continually allowed to stand despite not having been at the premises. TA is a big company whose business entirely depends on the investment of time and money by hoteliers, restaurant owners etc to whom they do not ask permission to use their trading name and who TA, remarkably, give no choice whether to appear on their site or not. If you earn big money you need to take the big responsibility - TA openly admits that it does not check reviews for veracity despite its long term strap "Get the truth than go". A more accurate reflection of its core business model is "get the unchecked opinion of anonymous strangers - then go." The line that opinions represent that of other people is a complete cop out, like an editor insisting the views are of his journalist not his own. The law as I understand it in England and Wales is when false material is brought to your attention you become on notice and are then liable as publisher of the material. You cannot, as TA does, take all the plums and leave all the duff. A generation hence people will be amazed at what big business was allowed to publish irresponsibly and just how little accountability there was during the first internet age.