Time to End This.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 ก.ย. 2024
- lmg.gg/secretl...
Thanks to Secretlab for being the title sponsor of LMG Clips this year! Check out their ergonomic gaming chairs at the link above. Your back will thank you!
The FTC issues a rule banning fake and misleading reviews.
Watch the full WAN Show: • I Subscribed To Disney...
► GET MERCH: lttstore.com
► GET EXCLUSIVE CONTENT ON FLOATPLANE: lmg.gg/lttfloa...
► SPONSORS, AFFILIATES, AND PARTNERS: lmg.gg/partners
► OUR WAN PODCAST GEAR: lmg.gg/wanset
FOLLOW US ON SOCIAL
---------------------------------------------------
Twitter: / linustech
Facebook: / linustech
Instagram: / linustech
TikTok: / linustech
TikTok (LMG Clips): www.tiktok.com/@_lmgclips_
Twitch: / linustech
Amazon banned me from doing reviews because I kept calling out all the fake reviews on the Garbage products that were being pumped out by Amazon Prime.
Ditto
i bought something on there for good reviews. it was garbage so i went back and looked at the reviews .. most of them were in spanish.. fortunately i can read spanish.. and they were all about a book.. and not for the item i got.. theres so many items like that that get switch around and keeps old postive reviews.
I got banned and threatened with litigation for leaving a scathing review about a book that had all sorts of flowery reviews written by people who had obviously never read it, and yes, I pointed out the other reviewers obviously hadn't read it. I'm guessing this is widespread practice.
I also got banned, but for mentioning a competitive brand name in a review
I'm banned from reviewing Anker products on Amazon because I gave a car charger 4 stars because it died after 1.5 years and I got a replacement. That was years ago, and after many support tickets I still can't.
This is America though, so the regulations are gonna be gone in a week when the supreme court says it’s “not in the FTC’s purview” despite this being squarely in their jurisdiction to regulate.
Considering the Hot water the Suprime Courts been in (especially regarding two of the judges in particular) they may wait a few weeks at least to try keeping prying eyes from uncovering more.
@@dragon1130nah, they're not under pressure from anyone, they've got lifetime appointments.
@@raawesome3851
There is one easy way to solve that
Lifetime is really limited if you want it to be
Very generous of you thinking it would be done in a week
Does it benefit the customer? If yes, then americans will think it's terrible and should not be implemented, because their favorite pastime is shooting themselves in the foot. At best the regulation will exist in technicality, but nobody enforces it.
We need to support and defend this as much as possible. If the Supreme Court does choose to rule against it, the people need to stand and tell the Supreme Court no! We want this! We need this!
Supreme Court justices are nominated by the president, confirmed by the Senate, and then serve indefinitely. The way to take a stand is to get out and vote this year
If the Supreme Court rules against it, Congress can still pass a law with these rules.
There must be a very young or just plainly civic-ignorant subset of people who watch LTT content.
That's not how the court system works. If you want a law passed, it has to go through our legislative branch. Our Supreme Court is used to decide if something is unconstitutional.
lol like that would actually do anything.
If the supreme court ruled against it, it would most likely be because it's outside the FTC's powers, which are a pretty good thing to keep defined. In that case, it should really be passed as a law, unless it's ruled to violate freedom of speech or something, requiring an amendment.
That last option seems possible enough because, while this policy is partially targeting defamation and false advertising, which are already illegal, it also restricts celebrity testimonials, botting from a third party, and how a website is presented. E.g. do we really want it written into the books that you can't buy someone's follow on social media, or that you can't lie that you like a product without using it? Sounds like something to make the social media deal with rather than getting the government to help defend them. It gets pretty broad and could have a lot of unintended restrictions somewhere down the line.
Still waiting to stop getting 10x calls a week from 'Hasel Moss for American funeral expenses."
Home Depot has reviews for a new battery that just dropped, but using reviews from the last generation. They only harms themselves in they case
That's something else that should have been in there.
Amazon bunching up different products under ONE selling page and ONE review pool should also be illegal. It drastically fucks up the accuracy of the reviews on one specific item.
@@lyianx Not only that, but it also obfuscates sellers, which can make issues when one seller is doing thing correctly regarding shipping items, but another is being lazy.
The Supreme Court has ensured that Amazon can sue and prevent this from being enforced.
Ahh, good old American corruption. Sorry, I mean lobbying.
And sue they will.
Yep. Just more lip service "progress" that won't result in anything.
Dunno why the dedicated a WAN show spot for this. Lip service "rulings" happen on nearly a weely basis.
@@JamesR624well it’s not intended to be lip service. It’s what they are actually attempting to do if they weren’t actively being undermined.
Just as they should rule: it's unconstitutional ("supremely illegal") for non-congressionally-created federal commissions and services like the FTC, IRS, FCC, SEC, and others to make or interpret laws, especially laws that are themselves illegal. They have no legitimate authority dictating law; the only duty they have is to provide federal services within the realm amd spirit of Constitutional Law; the responsibilities they currently have are supposed to be possessed by U.S. Congress and the U.S. Courts. The firearms commission for example is notorious for instituting illegal policies that seize or inhibit property rights where no due process of law has been exercised by the Justice system. IRS is the same thing, and so are all of the other commissions and agencies U.S. Congress has (illegally) delegated its roles to. Note that nowhere in the United States of America Constitution is granted to Congress the legal authority to "ship off", outsource, delegate, abscond from, or extend its constitutional powers, meaning that, in the near future, you will most likely begin to see a whole lot of lawsuits against these federal agencies particularly--- and rightly --- challenging their (illegitimate) authority. There are so many arbitrary codes and policies enforced, for instance, by the IRS which are in actuality not legal, not just because the U.S. Treasury is supposed to exercise these obligations itself, either. Read case law, the Constitution, rulings and journal entries made by Court Justices and their underwriters, and the history of these institutions, which all started as executive partners (hence "commission"/"agency") and were neither voted on by the States and their peoples nor mentioned anywhere in the Constitution.
"EU, you are our only hope."
FTC is all bark and no bite. Just to remind you, FTC many times has choosen to penaltise the wrongdoers with MINIMAL charge. Which is pocket change. Then never go for max.
Dies this count TH-cam likes and dislikes as reviews? If so does removing dislikes counter count as bad review suppression?
Oooh, nice!
I hope so!
lmao, no?
Removing the dislike counter was a bad thing, but like. no? no, it really obviously is not
Actually it does. Especially on videos that push out propaganda pieces. @@Plain--Jane
Does this mean Forced Reviews from Moving Companies with the guy hovering over you while you write it, are illegal now?
That's oddly specific
@@cornheadahh atp I wouldn't doubt it existed...
Probably to land a discount. An independent smartphone repair shop did this to my mom when she thought she busted her screen but just the tempered glass needed replaced. They wouldn't give her their reported 20% discount until she gave a 5-star review and mentioned his name
@@cornheadahh I will say, This has never happened to me (6'7", and never used a moving company), but I've heard it SO Many Times!
Is this the same FTC that has never gone after a company for their Warranty Stickers??? Yeah, this law/rule is utterly pointless.
TBF they have gotten a lot better since Lisa Kahn (sp?) took over.
All the laws and regulations in the world mean nothing without practical application. Can most people even detect fake reviews? If yes, will reporting it amount to anything in the end? Or will the company continue to act with impunity because the average user doesn't have the means to hold them accountable for it?
Soooo... does this apply to all the fake movie stuff on rotten tomatoes?
No supression of reviews?
So Valve can't hide\undo review bombs from paying customers anymore?
That is a feature you can turn off so probably won't be affected. Side note, I like that feature. I've seen way too many good games with negative ratings because of a small core of people who are butthurt about something that didn't happen exactly how they wanted.
@@the3nder1 flashbacks to when all cdpr games got reviewbombed because they stopped selling in Russia
Reviews on Amazon are trash. They’re pretty much all fake.
Yelp is similar. Even, or perhaps especially, the “Yelp elite” who review places in cities they’ve never been to.
There was a viral post about a teenage kid who was sitting at a bar in San Francisco waiting for a pizza from a shop next door. The staff told the kid he couldn’t wait within the bar’s area (it’s a thing they could lose their liquor license over). The kid refused to leave and basically said “what are you gonna do about it?” A random bar patron who was not associate with the bar or staff stood up and punched the kid (once - not legal and he was arrested for it). The kid left. His mom posted on social media that the workers at the bar attacked her son because he was Asian. The bar got THOUSANDS of fake reviews from Asian people all over the country. Most of them were saying the food was terrible and the staff screamed racist things at them (it’s a bar that doesn’t serve food, and has no history of discriminating against the 30% Asian population in SF).
And then the conservative supreme court gets flown out to a yacht for a weekend and strikes this down.
Should look into who's actually turning things down my man.
Computer online reviews are rife with employees of other companies giving terrible reviews to competitors. "Dumpster Fire" ring a bell?
Google Reviews site needs to close. We've (my workplace) had big problems with people posting false reviews on there, but Google ignored our requests to have them removed. One of the reviews was personally slanderous to someone who works there. Being in Australia makes it more difficult to pursue these matters.
It needs to be illegal for reviews to contain any staff member names or information that describes a staff member.
Meanwhile the reviews in the Philippines:
"Oh the delivery guy was so nice"
"They shipped my order early"
Reminds me I will have to start leaving more reviews for stuff I have bought on Amazon.
Don’t be surprised if negative reviews aren’t posted and you get a BS response as to why.
@@Bob_Smith19I had a 4 star review pulled after showing the device did not come with the advertised battery capacity. I had pictures and other docume Tatiana posted.
"No buying reviews of any kind" does that include sponsored review videos?
The article “reviews” or recommendations will probably just fall under ads since they aren’t customer reviews. When you see big/small news sites write whole “articles” about businesses or a product they are usually undisclosed paid ad spots. They’re meant to look like news coverage but the content in them isn’t an actual business or product review.
Apartment reviews fall under this? Also if its 51k max fine all of these companies are just going to make a fake review site and that way they just pay 1 violation and 51k for big companies is nothing.
With the chevron doctor and effectively detothed no American alphabet soup agency hasn't any teeth. Agencies can't make law anymore here.
I'm sure all those Shenzen sellers will immediately begin complying.
The problem is there's literally no platform that provides clear and unbiased reviews. Everyone is sponsored by someone, and has some agenda
I brought an earring-shape Bluetooth earphone at the price tag of 4000 yen because it came with good reviews. When it got delivered, it came with 3000 yen voucher "if" you give it a 5 stars review on Amazon JP. Its quality was super bad, as if it was from 100 yen shop. I threw away the voucher and wrote a 1 star review about its quality and the voucher.
The FTC doesnt have the power to make laws only enforce the laws passed by the law makers
I'm wondering how this will affect Amazon's Vine program. I'm actually participating in the program, and I actually get a load of free stuff that I can pick out so long as I provide honest reviews, but you could say that Amazon is "buying" reviews by giving people "free" stuff and requiring them to review those items to be able to keep them.
The FTC should never be MAKING law they should be enforcing it.
The FTCs power has eroded because this has NOT been what they have been spending most of their time on.
Favorite listicle reviews:
Item A (clearly sponsored) - Pros: Great build quality. Cons: None. Price $799
Item B (the hated competition) - Pros: Great build quality. Cons: Too expensive. Price $699.
?!
It will never be enforced.
This is going to END youtubes promotional section.
No it is not. Payed Advertisements and Reviews are not covered by this new Law and these kinds of vouchers you apparently get in America (not a thing in the EU) are also not covered, since all of them did not explicitly state you have to leave a good review to use the voucher. Only that you have to leave a review to use it, which is completely fine.
I am building a new computer and this is why I'm choosing Newegg over Amazon
I've got a slightly different take. I bought a little $14 mp3 player. The title for the listing claimed the ability to play MP4, although the listing description itself didn't. I trialled this little player for a while, and then posted a review.
I was contacted not long after that by the owners of the listing, asking me to boost the number of stars for my rating, as I'd posted a low number because of what I'd found out. I refused, saying that the review had been honest, and was based on the unit I had received and the functions I found with it. In short, it didn't play MP4. It had an abysmally low resolution on its screen, so I couldn't have played any video media unless I was to downconvert. In addition, the FM radio was mono only, and so was the significantly poor voice recording. I noticed not long after that, the product was removed entirely from the store, although I notice that there's now another device that almost matches the one I bought - it's the same metal case, but with slightly different functions on the player. i.e. it now has either 16GB or 32 GB, they can't seem to make up their minds. The brand name is different, but it's almost identical to what I bought several years ago.
Sigh. So it's not just fake reviews that get targeted by companies, it's real reviews too.
So are you saying that when Google gave a bunch of youtubers a free Pixel if they did a review that would not be "illegal". You saying if you got a free phone that you cannot be impartial. Geez. Never would have guessed.
Right here. Right now.
Does this extend to youtube comment sections? Since youtubers are selling a product and we are leaving a review lol
why is there not a review code when you buy something?
I just bought a wifi camrea they offered me a free year of cloud storage it's a good camrea actually when I went to do the review it was suspended on Amazon couldn't do a review
I’m from the government and I’m here to help
Does anyone know when these laws are gonna be implemented?
Your warranty void if you dont give them 5 stars and positive review
So are they gonna check if they are fake or not?
Would this also include TH-cam comments in certain circumstances?
huh, but if you're large enough and have lawyers and money you can continue to skirt the rules and the morality of business consumer relationships.
I always did the paid reviews, but the moment they pay me I did a legit review with the correct stars (so the fake review stood on the product for around 2h)
Ooh does this mean Twitch will be forced to remove all of the bot accounts?
Rossman did some videos over attempted Yelp extortion back in the day.
Of course you could still filter and hate speech reviews, make it a condition of posting.
If you care enough just ask the person to reword it.
Of course the big question is who is going to enforce these - how hard will they be to prove and who will jump through those hoops.
What about Vine reviews?
That seems like a loophole to continue the same practice.
Seems like a clearly posted reviewer code of conduct in regards to language/hate speech would be appropriate
1:17 I only listened to the audio and it sounded like bro just lit up a blunt. 😂
2:27 why are you guys against having to display all the reviews and not remove any? I guess it would cause problems if something got review bombed but you shouldn’t be able to just remove negative reviews.
A review that isn't a product review, but is just using the review platform to post a hate speech rant full of profanity, that's the kind of review they're talking about filtering out and removing. Hence the concern about being forced to leave those up.
The FTC is going to loose this. The first amendment over rides almost all their ability to do this in the USA.
You have absolutely no clue what you’re talking about
First amendment only applies to government entities suppressing free speech. Additionally, only applies to suppressing a form of speech. This is not suppressing a form of any speech, as not being able to remove comments is not suppression.
@@colinkirkpatrick5618 Yes the government entity is the FTC.
@@brandonhoover2120 The argument will go like this. Government has no right to stop us from buying reviews or paying to make reviews. SCOTUS ruled money is speech and thus this will be a first amendment argument and the government will loose.
I rate this video 5*
Hopefully sponsored reviews fucking stopped too
For me the problems with reviews is that most reviews are from people that just received the item,open the box and power on. Not evem tested the product for more that 5 minutes. Other reviews are from people who expect everything from a really cheap item. Other blame the product for their mistakes. Other don't understand that the review is for the product/item and NOT the seller. Basically most reviews are from people that clearly can't make reviews.
Or I don't understand why ebay pestures me to leave feedback on an item _that hadn't even shipped yet_ LOL
love this
Wait.. does this mean that BBB is going to be useful? If you cannot suppress reviews, that means that their entire model kinda falls apart.
BBB?
@@ingocernohorsky Better Business Bureau
Sounds like this will kill Marques Brownlee's entire business model.
Since youtube videos are now company property. Are youtube comments reviews? Do blocking comments a violation?
There are very few actual use cases for the internet left. I've accepted it. So should you.
What's going to happent to UserBenchmark? :D
Stop paying creators to provide false reviews as well. LTT is guilty of this more than anyone
Im not even saying i disbelieve you persay, but what are you talking about? Can you provide examples? Sponsoring someone to talk about a product isnt faking a review
Um, evidence? You can't say that out of the blue and expect people to just believe you.
Most sponsorships include scripts along the lines of "I did x, I enjoy y" but the reality is none fo these creators do. Even those raid shadow legends people are saying I love raid here's my gameplay" and as someone who played raid, can confirm their footage is from the first 10 minutes of gameplay.
first
im first at being the 550th
@@spaztor7723 you cant be first if your replying to a comment
Beatbot Aqua Pro refunded my purchase if I bumped my 3 star critical but fair review of their product. So, I did, that's a $2k pool bot I got to keep, if I gave it a 5 star. What I did to save some dignity was kept my critical review, and amended it to say they have glowing customer service and the new features just pushed to the app, doesn't 100% fix my prior complaints but shows they're ever evolving the user experience with fun new features. If the product is crap, expensive and they do that, sometimes I'll take the money, but if it's
Each of your videos is a true work of art that brings joy and inspiration!🛴🌝💫
you seem to have pooped your pants