Buying & Selling Reviews

[Party Rocker]

You are over thinking it, yes businesses can take advantage of this and can basically write their own reviews and lie to consumers, which is obviously bad and wrong but it is just something you need to think about when reading any review of any product, service, or experience.

I don't think they should lie to consumers, and I do believe disclosing the complimentary things points out the fact their ideas may be different because they didn't have to pay for it. What I said is, that is goal of social media, to be social with your consumers and look good. That is the goal, how you achieve that goal should be done through honestly improving and displaying your product and making the product as most ideal as possible for the consumer and advertising it in such a way that keeps the goal and how to achieve that goal properly in mind.

EDIT:
I end my discussion here so that I can limit my daily posts. I do not wish to clog up with site with my posts, so I will continue my posting tomorrow starting at midnight.

 

[Parkgoer]

Explain how I am overthinking it if I have SEEN it happen.. WITH MY EYES... TALKED TO THE PEOPLE. There is no overthinking, it is all choosing not to live in a protected bubble that portrays the world as hugging and holding hands. Google it. It is everywhere blowing the lid off of what is going on.

Having conspiracy called is the typical response from those who do not want to see it. Once again I do not have any distaste for THIS article. I just do not want to see the issues at Disney resulting from Social Media occur here.

 

[b.mac]

Explain how I am overthinking it if I have SEEN it happen.. WITH MY EYES... TALKED TO THE PEOPLE. There is no overthinking, it is all choosing not to live in a protected bubble that portrays the world as hugging and holding hands. Google it. It is everywhere blowing the lid off of what is going on.

Having conspiracy called is the typical response from those who do not want to see it. Once again I do not have any distaste for THIS article. I just do not want to see the issues at Disney resulting from Social Media occur here.

The bloggers for Universal parks are guilty of it, too. It's amazing just how many people there are that game off of the parks trying to generate positive media attention from these reviews.

I've heard of a guy named Lou Mongello, he basically has leadership in celebrity magazine which is known for their Disney articles of endless praise. The guy basically has a stranglehold on Disney's social media by himself, and he allows other people to blog about disney like this lady. It's not a question of if people play off of this, it's a question of how many people play off of this. It's incredibly easy for most people to completely botch a review about a park for compensation, and it's against FTC laws to not disclose of the fact that they are being endorsed for their reviews.

 

[Haberdasher1973]

I'll just say this:

When a theatrical piece is reviewed, free tickets are sent to the paper, website, or what have you. The reviewer does not, however, get open bar at intermission, a free tee shirt and/or a free poster, as it would be looked upon as bribery.

I just think that this whole situation is smack in the middle of a rather grey area. Yes, there was a disclaimer, but many people might not read the entire review to see it once they've perceived that it's a glowing reaction. Is the park wrong to point to a good review? Absolutely not... but I think it's the whole set of circumstances together that make things, well, not necessarily wrong, but questionable... It could easily look to some like a snake oil salesman with a plant in the audience.

 

[Ben]

It's just business.....

 

[Parkgoer]

It's just business.....

So was the Capone dynasty and Mexican Drug Cartel.

 

[Shafor]

I'll just say this:

When a theatrical piece is reviewed, free tickets are sent to the paper, website, or what have you. The reviewer does not, however, get open bar at intermission, a free tee shirt and/or a free poster, as it would be looked upon as bribery.

I just think that this whole situation is smack in the middle of a rather grey area. Yes, there was a disclaimer, but many people might not read the entire review to see it once they've perceived that it's a glowing reaction. Is the park wrong to point to a good review? Absolutely not... but I think it's the whole set of circumstances together that make things, well, not necessarily wrong, but questionable... It could easily look to some like a snake oil salesman with a plant in the audience.

>End Scene<