In the era of online reviews, Trustpilot stands as a giant, offering a platform for users to voice their opinions and share experiences about businesses. On the surface, it promises to be “free and open,” driven by genuine user reviews. However, a closer look reveals a troubling reality—a system that seemingly holds companies hostage, violates its own terms, and raises questions about the true nature of its openness.
For many companies, Trustpilot wasn’t a deliberate choice; rather, they found themselves thrust into the platform by the actions of users. A 5-star review left by a user in 2019 for Shoprocket on Trustpilot meant that Shoprocket was now listed on the platform, subject to public reviews that the company had no control over. This seemingly democratic approach to reviews, where real users share real experiences, has an appealing concept. However, Trustpilot’s practices suggest a different story, and allegations of outright extortion add another layer to the controversy.
Trustpilot’s claim that anyone can add a “business profile” to their platform seems democratic, yet it raises serious concerns. Once a profile is added, it becomes an irremovable entity. The ability to “claim” the business profile is only possible through verification of legal representation, and even then, the company cannot erase its information from Trustpilot’s database. While Trustpilot argues this is to maintain the authenticity of reviews, it leads to a dilemma when reviews are fake or when the relationship between Trustpilot and a business turns sour.
This predicament is a “catch-22.” Businesses are bound by Trustpilot’s terms, even if they did not willingly sign up for the platform. Trustpilot’s defense is that by using their services, businesses implicitly agree to these terms. However, the issue arises when a company is listed without consent due to a user’s review, stripping them of the right to decide whether they want to be part of Trustpilot’s ecosystem.
To respond to a review on Trustpilot, businesses must register and, inevitably, accept the terms. Whether a business opts for the free or paid services, agreeing to these terms becomes a non-negotiable condition. This practice raises questions about the fairness of Trustpilot’s terms, especially when businesses are essentially coerced into accepting them.
The flaws in Trustpilot’s system become even more apparent when put to the test. The article’s author illustrates the vulnerability of Trustpilot’s platform by posting a review for a fictitious company. This fictitious review, once published, remains on Trustpilot indefinitely. The potential for abuse is evident, as anyone can create false narratives that may harm a business’s reputation, and the onus is on the business to defend itself.
Imagine the consequences if instead of a fabricated company, a fake review targets a local business. Trustpilot’s system allows false claims to persist until the affected business takes action. While Trustpilot offers a process for investigating the legitimacy of reviews, the burden of proof falls on the shoulders of the business. This sets up a scenario where businesses must actively defend themselves against unverified claims on a platform they did not willingly join.
In conclusion, Trustpilot’s facade of being a “free and open” platform begins to crumble under scrutiny. The platform’s practices, including the inability to remove a business profile and the requirement to accept terms without explicit consent, raise ethical and legal concerns. Trustpilot’s promise of authenticity in reviews is undermined by a system that leaves businesses vulnerable to false claims, challenges their autonomy, and calls into question the very principles the platform claims to uphold.
Leave a Reply