When it comes to winning in the App Store, one PR firm has discovered a dynamite strategy: throw ethics out the window. Reverb Communications, a PR firm that represents dozens of game publishers and developers, has managed to find astounding success on Apple’s App Store for its clients. Among its various tactics? It hires a team of interns to trawl iTunes and other community forums posing as real users, and has them write positive reviews for their client’s applications. Yeah, that 5-star iTunes app review you saw for the once top-5 paid app Enigmo? It might not be written by a real user, but rather by Pangea Software’s PR firm. Reverb isn’t the first to try and game the user review process, but they are definitely one of the most blatant cases.
Reverb Communications is an extremely successful PR firm that claims to have “first party” and “personal” relationships with Apple. Aside from representing Pangea Software, one of the more successful App developers for the iPhone (they made Enigmo, which was featured during the Apple WWDC Keynote 2008), they also represent Harmonix (the Guitar Hero and Rock Band guys), MTV Games, and a host of iPhone game developers. Additionally, they’ve managed to do an impressive job at courting the press: clients have had iPhone apps featured in just about every major media outlet known to man, including Forbes, MTV, G4TV, NBC (in fact, all the examples were for one developer: Publisher X, which Reverb happens to own). Reverb claims that their clients have sold over $2 Billion of product under their watch.
Update: Reverb Communications has just sent over a statement, which we have included at the base of this article.
Unfortunately, they don’t always follow the rules, and they have been stupid enough to tell that to prospective clients. One prospective client, hereby known as “Developer Y,” (no irony intended) recently let us on to Reverb’s lack of scruples. This tipster forwarded us a document from Reverb Communications (attached below) that described what services Reverb provides to its clients. For $0.75 per paid download of your app, you get a whole host of standard PR services, and then some … not so standard ones. Here’s a quote from the doc:
Reverb employs a small team of interns who are focused on managing online message boards, writing influential game reviews, and keeping a gauge on the online communities. Reverb uses the interns as a sounding board to understand the new mediums where consumers are learning about products, hearing about hot new games and listen to the thoughts of our targeted audience. Reverb will use these interns on Developer Y products to post game reviews (written by Reverb staff members) ensuring the majority of the reviews will have the key messaging and talking points developed by the Reverb PR/marketing team.
It gets worse. They call these “internal user reviews” and outline the process for creating them here:
Internal User Reviews Process:
o Internal “User Reviews”
o Pre-written by in house writers
o Positive reviews – not over the top – but endorsing the game as a good product
o Age ranges
+ 12 – 18
+ 19 – 25
+ 26 – 34
+ 35 – 45
+ 46+
* Written from the angle of each age group including key words that resonate with each audience
* Reviews begin to go live on day of launch on the iPhone storefront
o Release reviews starting at launch as stretch over 14 days from release
Yes, the “iPhone storefront” that Reverb Communications is referring to is the one you all know as the iTunes App Store. Our source assured us this document was real, but seeing as how it was our first time with the guy, we decided to double-check. We went to the App Store page for one of their client’s apps, specifically HydroTilt XL by Publisher X, and looked at the earliest app reviews for the title. Sure enough, the first five reviews for HydroTilt XL were glowing 5-star ratings. But, of course, we weren’t satisfied. The app now has over 908 ratings, and 348 of those ratings were 5-star. Clearly, it was a popular app and users really liked it. So, a few positive ratings doesn’t prove anything.
Fortunately, iTunes allows you to see other reviews posted by the same reviewer. So, we clicked on the reviewer “Vegas Bound” (iTunes link) and started to look at his reviews. He reviewed 7 applications, and gave each one of them 5 stars. Each review was short and sweet, and extremely positive. These reviews represented 6 different developers. A quick Google search revealed an infuriating truth: every single one of these developers was a client of one PR firm: Reverb Communications. The trail of bread crumbs slowly led us to a stark conclusion: the evidence undeniably confirmed the document that Developer Y had sent us. As we continued through each of the first 5 reviewers of HydroTilt XL, we noticed that the problem had plagued as many as 15 iPhone applications (and probably more).
Below is a table so you can see what we noticed. Each developer on this chart was represented by Reverb Communications for the title that was reviewed. The left-hand column is a reviewer and blank squares indicate apps that were not reviewed. None of the reviewers wrote reviews for non-Reverb clients. None of the reviewers gave an app less than 5 stars.
Yeah, that pretty much says it all. These guys are running amok in the App Store. Some of Reverb Communications’ clients (*ahem* Publisher X *ahem*) had reviewers who exclusively reviewed one client’s apps. That doesn’t necessarily imply foul play, of course, as users often buy multiple apps from the same developer. Furthermore, there were many 5-star reviews written by users who didn’t write any additional reviews, but that doesn’t hold a whole lot of water either. The real compelling proof of wrongdoing was that many of their client’s titles had multiple 5 star reviews written by reviewers who exclusively covered Reverb Communications games. I understand loyalty to a specific company. I understand being lazy and just writing one review, but loyalty to a PR firm is unheard of. Especially when the name of the PR firm isn’t anywhere near the iTunes store description.
It’s important to note that the reviews mentioned above are just a subset of the reviews that we believe Reverb has published on behalf of its clients. Due to space and time considerations, we did not want to belabor the point by adding more reviewers and reviews to the list.
Ultimately, this is fraud. Plain and simple. Reverb Communications is using anonymized reviews as a way to boost sales, while lying to iTunes users. The worst part is many of these games stand by themselves. They have dozens of positive reviews from users (which we are assuming are not employees of Reverb). The developers are culprits as well. We don’t have proof of whether they know about the wrongdoing – we do not know whether the document sent to Developer Y was the same as the one sent to all of Reverb Communications’ other clients. That doesn’t exonerate the developers who are clients of Reverb; some of them have been repeat customers (Pangea Software comes to mind) for almost a year. We find it hard to believe they weren’t privy to Reverb’s actions.
Furthermore, this story only dives into the iTunes fraud. Frankly, this was enough for us, and it was also the best place to catch Reverb in the act. However, the document sent to us by Developer Y indicates that they don’t just mislead folks on iTunes, they also use “online message boards” and other ways to communicate with potential customers. We also only talked about their iPhone app delinquence. To me, the actions on the iPhone app store, Reverb’s willingness to talk to prospective clients about these actions and the pervasiveness of the problem across all of Reverb’s iPhone app developers, mean only one thing: they are shady people. And I wouldn’t be surprised if they had similar ethics-be-damned practices in other parts of their PR approach. But we don’t know, and don’t care. The miscreant behavior on the App Store is enough that I know I won’t ever deal with someone from Reverb again.
Another interesting side-story here is about Reverb’s relationship with Apple. Now, we don’t expect Apple to have caught the bad behavior of one PR firm on the App Store’s reviews. That would just be ridiculous. But we were surprised to know that Reverb had worked with Apple so much. As such, I can’t imagine anybody will be more furious about this news than Apple itself. They’ve done TV commercials for these guys, for pete’s sake. We don’t know a whole lot about the relationship, however. All we know is that one client of Reverb’s told us that he was referred to Reverb Communications by an Apple employee. That employee, from what we know, was part of a team that manages Apple’s relationships with 3rd party developers. The referral was likely an innocent mistake: I doubt the employee knew of Reverb’s questionable ethics. But it just makes the story that much more interesting – this isn’t your mom and pop PR shop. Reverb has a staff of 15 professionals (presumably full-time employees) and 10 interns.
Needless to say, we’re interested in your thoughts. The comments section is below and I look forward to seeing what you think. Please keep your comments rated PG, if possible.
We asked Reverb for a statement, and this is what they have sent us. (My response is below it).
Hi Gagan –
I’m sure you are speaking with one of our former employees that has been contacting media outlets about Reverb. I’m not sure what “unethical practices” you are referring to so it would be hard for me to comment, but I am hoping that you will do the proper research to ensure that the facts you are reporting are accurate and nit written based on information provided by a disgruntled former employee who is violating his confidentiality agreement.
My office did mention that you had issues with our staff and interns writing reviews for some of our clients games, I’m sure you are aware that in order to write a review on iTunes an individual needs to purchase the game or app and can only write one review. Our interns and employees write their reviews based on their own game play experience, after having purchased the game by themselves, a practice not uncommon by anyone selling games or apps and hardly unethical.
I am in Europe until Tuesday, I’ll keep my eyes out for the story, once again I do hope you do some homework before posting erroneous or incorrect information about Reverb communications.
Doug Kennedy
No, we didn’t speak with a former employee, and no such former employee is mentioned in this story. I did in fact inform Reverb via phone (I spoke with their VP of Public Relations, Tracie Snitker) last night that the story was about writing reviews on behalf of clients. I don’t buy the argument that the interns and employees write reviews based on their own experiences: it’s a nice story, but at the end of the day, probably not true. Flipping through the reviews on iTunes and examining the text and messaging will give you a clear indication that it corroborates the story Developer Y told us. Furthermore, taking just one of many examples, the reviews for Publisher X’s HydroTilt XL came out within 2 days of the game’s release. I find it hard to believe that 5 positive reviews from Reverb (which owns Publisher X) were not planned or coordinated. Not to mention the fact that we’ve got a document from Reverb explicitly laying out their policy on this matter.
Here is the document provided to us by Developer Y. We’ve taken out irrelevant parts of the doc and replaced them with “…”
Reverb Communications Proposal:Top-line: Reverb Communications team will develop a full public relations and marketing campaign for the launch of … [Developer Y's] iPhone products.
Public Relations Strategy:
Reverb will instill a public relations strategy that will focus on product reviews and “earned” media. Our programs will be designed uniquely and specifically for each title with the intention of driving industry and consumer awareness through press interviews, product reviews and previews, and out-of-the-box programs. Aspects on the PR program include:
o Traditional plan used to launch gaming software
o Messaging and Positioning
o Press Releases
o Media Outreach
o Preview Code (if applicable)
o Review Code (if applicable)
o Focus on Online and Print Publications
o Media Tours (if applicable)Apple Marketing Support:
Reverb will work directly with Apple on each and every iPhone title. While Reverb cannot guarantee full marketing support for every iPhone game, we are confident with the proper PR and marketing presentation to Apple they will support each individual title.
Reverb has secured the following types of Apple marketing support for our iPhone clients including:
* On-stage appearance with Steve Jobs at WWDC
* National iPhone television commercials
* Apple retail programs, Apple direct e-mail pieces
* iTunes App placement on the App Store
* Placement on the “What Hot,” “Staff Favorite,” and “What’s New”
* Premier placement on the Apple iPhone store.Intern Program:
Reverb employs a small team of interns who are focused on managing online message boards, writing influential game reviews, and keeping a gauge on the online communities. Reverb uses the interns as a sounding board to understand the new mediums where consumers are learning about products, hearing about hot new games and listen to the thoughts of our targeted audience. Reverb will use these interns on Developer Y products to post game reviews (written by Reverb staff members) ensuring the majority of the reviews will have the key messaging and talking points developed by the Reverb PR/marketing team.
Internal User Reviews Process:
o Internal “User Reviews”
o Pre-written by in house writers
o Positive reviews – not over the top – but endorsing the game as a good product
o Age ranges
+ 12 – 18
+ 19 – 25
+ 26 – 34
+ 35 – 45
+ 46+* Written from the angle of each age group including key words that resonate with each audience
* Reviews begin to go live on day of launch on the iPhone storefront
o Release reviews starting at launch as stretch over 14 days from release* Message boards
o Blogs
o Online Sites
o GameStats and GameRankings (if applicable)
* Ongoing public relations outreach will continue through the launch of the title with various key elementso Final code being sent to review sites (if applicable)
o Inbound and outbound media inquiries being immediately addressed* Press release writing, interviews and product articles – The iPhone storefront provides the unique aspect of allowing games to remain for sale, for and extended period of time, it will be important for Developer Y to maintain a sustainable public relations campaign supporting the title. Reverb Communications recommends a program which maintains continuous press coverage. Reverb has developed several proprietary video game media lists including, but not limited to, press list specifically for the iPhone. Reverb’s recommendation is to begin with the iPhone specific press but quickly take Developer Y titles to mainstream media.
Sample Media List
The media outlets below have been identified because they currently, or have previously covered, iPhone products. This list does not represent the entire list Reverb is recommending and is only intended as a sample list of media Reverb has worked with previously.
1up
4theGamers
AOL Games
Cheat Code Central
CHEATCODES.COM
…
Wireless Gaming Review and More!Recommended Marketing Asset List:
* Trailers (prep days from release)
…
* Game One Sheet (ready to go 45 days from release)
o (5) Screen shots that showcase titleOnline Marketing Opportunities
* Video Uploading
o Reverb interns will upload trailers to UGC sites (internal list of over 100 sites)
o If there is an exclusive release with a certain site, uploading will begin following exclusive
o Links to uploads kept in a spreadsheet for views tracking
o Tagging and keywords to be developed for each video
+ Words that describe the product
+ Words that our market commonly use
+ “Hot” words and current web searches
* Cross Links
o Digg, Facebook, MySpace any positive press relating to a title (when applicable)
+ Timing is immediate
* Web 2.0 Applications
o Twitter, Facebook, MySpace all content relating to title (when applicable)
+ Video uploads
+ Positive press
+ User reviews
* Social Networks
o Link content to places where consumers are social (when applicable)
+ Facebook, MySpace, StumbleUpon
+ Blogs
+ PodcastsBy working with Reverb Communications, Developer Y can be confident each of their iPhone titles will receive the proper press coverage each title deserves. Reverb will manage all aspects of media from aggressively seeking out product reviews and write-ups, scheduling interviews for Developer Y executives to fielding inbound media requests, Reverb will manage all aspects of consumer and corporate PR and Marketing allowing Developer Y to focus on upcoming projects.
UNIQUE ELEMENTS OF EACH GAME:
Reverb will develop a unique program for Developer Y App focusing on “earned media” or placed stories designed to garnish mainstream media attention.
APP STORE PLACEMENT EXAMPLES:
For iPhone games, we recommend that the launch of public relations be timed with the Apple marketing programs. When each game is submitted, we let it get posted/go live on the App Store, and then within a 2 week window the press release announcing the game goes out day-in date with the Apple marketing programs.
Included in the Program:
* Product positioning plan
* Management of Apple marketing programs
* Product messaging
* Press release writing
* Press release distribution through Reverb Games News (if requested, professional wire service costs are additional)
* Press outreach and follow-up (associated OOP costs not included)
* All Intern related programs
* Press coverage reports
* 1 Press associates assigned to the account
* 1 Team Marketing member to manager interns
</div
Update: Reverb Communications has issued a statement about this story, as follows in full:
Reverb Statement:
Reverb would like to clarify a few items regarding the MobileCrunch story about our agency that ran this weekend. The article “Cheating the App Store” is unfortunately full of emotion, logical holes and for the most part untrue. Here are the facts:
1. The writer forgot that Reverb Communications is not just a public relations agency, but is also a sales and marketing agency. Reverb’s marketing department has interns that do social viral marketing.
2. Our interns do not post reviews on iTunes. Our employees don’t post fake reviews. It’s common for Reverb team members to purchase the games and write a review in iTunes using their personal accounts AFTER they have played the game. In many cases Reverb has provided technical feedback and gameplay guidance to the app developer, long before these games hit the App Store, so we know these games extremely well. We also like these games or we wouldn’t take them on as clients. The entire list of iTunes accounts in your story are from staff members who have played the games.
3. 1 person=1 iTunes account=1 credit card. We do not have hundreds of accounts to “trawl” through iTunes – it’s simply untrue. We have 10 staff members who choose to post on the games when and if they have played the game. We have to buy and play the game in order to have an opinion.
4. This same writer contacted several of our app store developers wanting negative comments from them regarding Reverb. They all gave positive feedback, but the writer left this aspect out of the story.
The best way to stop this is to continue to call out Apps (not just the PR firm) that use this tactic.
i agree – send a clear message to the MAKERS of the games that duping consumers will draw the ire of consumers…the end effect will be dev ethics, the onus should be upon them to review pr firm tactics (though honestly, they’ll likely go for any firm that can drive up sales, right?) – if they’ve even got a budget for PR, then they’re on a different scale from most devs already…
Hello Gagan, this is 2006 calling. You’re late to the party by over 2.5 years.
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2006/02/01/
Old news.
This is old news. 2.5 years old to be precise. And the story was broken by Penny Arcade, of all places.
http://www.penny-arcade.com/2006/02/01/
Haha, Caught with their hands in the cookie jar.
I truly hope that all publishers who do use this particular PR firm including those big name companies will drop it and find another pretty quickly.
Of course they will drop them and find another PR firm immediately. It will be another PR firm that does the same thing though.
Ive heard that a well written negative review can drive sales even more than a positive review from a source that appears disingenuous.
Ding, ding – You are the winner!
As an intern in a web design company, in the past, I was asked to write comments for their blog – but I always followed strict rules of ethics/discipline: Al together I wrote about dozen comments.
1) I gave my full name, correct email, and let it know that I am connected to the company.
2) I gave mostly formidable and critical reviews, consistently reminding myself, frankly, that being honest is the most clever way of generating analysis that can lead to an higher probability of being viewed well by the target audience.
3) 2/3 negative – 1/3 positive.
Aka-Aki…you better watch out!
You would be surprised how many big companies are doing it (not mentioned here). Moreover, I cannot believe that apple is still allowing developers to change the availability date with updates so that the new updates show up as new releases.
One would expect these things are happening… I just didn’t know that they were happening at this scale.
We shall now see how skilled they are in the art of crisis communications.
It will also be interesting to watch apple respond.
Apple will need to put a good face on it by appearing outraged. But the truth, why should they be outraged? If these tactics move more games and drive more interest in the App Store, then they are to Apple’s benefit. Apple is in business to provide a fair and balanced set of reviews for apps. They are in business to sell as many apps and iPhones as they can.
For some reason I wonder if they’ll even bother looking outraged. These practices are unfortunate but they are by virtue of their ubiquity also a grey area. Besides this kind of marketing tactic is as old as commerce itself… Reminds me of an old Latin saying: caveat emptor.
Well, I don’t think so.
If a consumer buys a good rated app, and it’s just crap, this will affect the overall image of the apps…
And the consumer probably won’t buy other apps again…
Apple should be worried and fight these bastards / this methods.
Touché, sir.
These kind of PR tactics disgust team. Although, you have to give them some kudos for realizing the power in non-markter (ironically enough) dominated information. Conversational Marketing is to some extent the future and a reality on the social web.
I rarely comment here, (merely lurking and soaking up the words) but this story is horrific.
Seriously, this is BAD form.
Kudos for putting it under the microscope.
I feel the exact same way on this shady issue, and I don’t think that I could have said it better myself.
They should be ashamed. I wonder what their clients think?
Wow. It’s like the Watergate of the new century!
Nice story but I’m surprised you sound so surprised by these practices.
Almost every SEO company in the world are doing the same thing – hiring tens of kids to write or link to your PR and site in order to improve your place in search engines (and yes – they do use forums and write good reviews about your product).
Although this is definitely a behavior we should try to kill, it is very common in the web. Reverb is just one of tens of thousands of other companies who act at the same way.
As the practice of corporations using these types of marketing tactics may be true, PR firms should not be in this type of business. It IS fraud and unethical. This is guerrilla marketing so it should be left to those… guerrilla marketing firms. This is no way to develop and maintain positive working relationships with the media or your current and potential customers. I’m appalled.
Let me correct this statement. A good pr-agency tries to find the good points in someones software and the difference to others which makes it stand out in a positive way and the other products are mostly mentioned too so a user can test it for himself if there’s a possibility to it.
A bad agency just writes about the single product and tries to push things which are obviously not that special to the top (like Apple with the new iPhone 3GS video and mms features).
It would be a better practice of the pr agency if they would get like 50 people to download this once on-site and then ask them to test it for a limited time and write a review for it. That’s marketing research and normally something a pr-agency should also do.
The only software reviews I really trust are made by you & me: wakoopa.com
who gives a flying fuck? this is just a trivial form of the same way that obama gamed the system
how can people turn EVERYTHING political? Unbelievably lame.
you’re nuts
I thought this is the exact thing PR firms were hired to do — manage the public’s view of a company by presenting them in the best possible light through all legal means.
It is up to Apple to make their review system more transparent — much like how Amazon gives certain reviewers designations such as “Top 500 reviewer” or “Real Name” to build trust that the reviewer is reliable.
If this PR firm wasn’t engaging in this process but other PR firms were doing it, then they’d be doing their clients a disservice. If you don’t exploit the same loopholes as your competitors, you are at a disadvantage. Again, it is up to Apple to close the loophole, not for PR firms to “take the high road.”
Bullcr@p:
“It’s not the thief’s fault that he broke into the bank and stole money, he saw other thieves doing it and anyway responsibility lies with the police to stop people from turning into theives.”
Wrong. It is this company’s responsibility to act ethically.
No, this isn’t what PR does. It’s out job to inform people about a product (legitimately and honestly) and highlight it’s benefits. Not skulk around anonymously in forums and feedback sites lying about a product to con people into downloading it.
This sort of activity is beyond unethical and is a black mark on my profession.
*NEWSFLASH* The world is a fucked up moral and ethical mess full of selfserving assholes, and Reverb is only one of many playing by their rules. What a shocking discovery! Boohoo…
+1
Thanks for your comment SK, it says a lot about the sense of ethics of the anti-Obama crowd. Quite enlightening.
Troll management rules:
1) Do not feed the trolls, lest you encourage them.
2) If you are going to ignore #1, at least mock them.
Reverb is going to make a killing off this article. This was the best press they could have ever received. What is the difference between this and my friend down the street who asks everyone he meets, annoyingly so, to buy his app and give him 5 stars? I wish I would have known about them before you just made them the hottest PR firm for the App Store market. Hey wait a minute, are they paying you to write this article about them? Everyone is going to hire them now.
Seriously, if my app was even close to ready I would contact these people in a snap. All this press for them, results that seem to have worked and only for $0.75 more per download? Seems completely worth it. Unless Apple removes all the apps that have been represented by this firm, they seem like they are well worth the money.
… gosh, I wonder at which weblogs their interns leave pseudonymous comments…. ;-)
Seriously, if you’re reading anonymous web speech to learn whether something “is good” or “is bad”, that’s crazy. We can use anonymous web speech to find _new_ ideas, but you’ve got to treat each utterance as if there is ulterior motive regardless.
Put more simply: Don’t believe everything you read. “Salinger Syndrome” is one of the big dangers facing our species today.
Watch out. Interns from Reverb may be busy posting comments on this thread as we speak! :-)
Disclosure: I do not work for Reverb, nor was I a disgruntled former employee.
This is seriously shady shit. I can’t believe that they would come out and blatantly say that to prospective clients. And the fact that anyone can be that deceitful in any industry, especially PUBLIC RELATIONS is sickening. I hope they get such a stain from this story, they go out of business. Honestly.
Who, honestly, reads the reviews when buying a $0.99 app on a whim. Quickly look at the icon, the description, the screenshots. Are you interested? Does it spell quality? Are you ready to take the risk to have to do 8 minutes overtime at McDonald’s to compensate if you get screwed?
The person who wrote this article is obviously not a professional journalist of any sort…blogger, or what have you. Report facts not emotions. Your article is tainted with slant and nonsensical language.
I think you said it best though: “So, a few positive ratings doesn’t prove anything.” 5 positive reviews probably don’t mean anything in the storm of the 1000s of other retards ranking apps.
“OMG THIS KFC FINDER APP IS AWSOME. 5 STRS!!! LADIES HIT ME UP dudeman@hotmail.com1!!!!”
And do you think this is even news? Black and Decker and several other companies got caught doing this on amazon.com. Shit ING Direct MADE employees sign up for savings products to make it look like they were more popular and effective than they really were. SNNOOOOREEE.
This is what these companies do. This is not an issue of ethics. This is also not news.
Also, your comment “The miscreant behavior on the App Store is enough that I know I won’t ever deal with someone from Reverb again.” is interesting. Have you dealt with Reverb before? Are you leaking documents given to you under NDA? Hmm…speaking of ethical lapses.
Move along…nothing new here.
of course this is news. the point is the firm is using this extremely dishonest tactic as a selling tool to get new clients.
This is surely just the tip of the iceberg. There are hundreds of questionably successful apps on the app store, and there’s no doubt that there are lots of shady tactics being used beyond just posting positive user reviews (probably along with some interesting and innovative honest marketing strategies).
Sounds like someone should write a followup post on TechCrunch uncovering what’s really going on — “The Secret Strategies Behind iPhone App Success.” ;)
Nothing new here maybe but certainly doesn’t warrant moving along without reading.
Are you a Reverb shill?
Seems you have lost your moral compass Matt G.
Ok now, lets see what you scored in your ethics class…hmmm…FAIL.
actually, I wish more journalism was like this… serious examination of the facts, and an honest assessment of wrongdoing.
reverb intern
Haha. No Reverb intern here.
I suppose selling false reviews isn’t very cool. My main point was that this is not very shocking or new.
And good luck getting a comment from Apple. They aren’t known for being very verbal about business practices.
Go back to work Reverb-boy
amazing.
No green bar for you Michael?
sometimes i comment via facebook connect instead. to mix things up. that’s just how i roll.
PR Sucks! Now What?
We are having a live forum to discuss just this topic next week in San Francisco.
W/Guy, Loic, Louis Gray, Renee Blodgett and Steve Patrizi.
Let’s get the topic out in the open and discuss it.
sfama.org
In fact, Reverb, we’ll give you free tickets to the event if you’d like to participate in the discussion next week.
@Mark – your panel is ridiculously biased. how about another person from the marketing side of the world? Using people like Guy and Loic as barometers of PR/marketing is just out of whack, as they represent the top 0.0001% of connected Silicon Valley tech-stars…
@jeremy
Not sure I understand (exactly) about the panel being “ridiculously biased”… We have Loic on the panel because he’s the person who came up w/the refrain “PR, Advertising, and Marketing Suck!”
It makes sense to have him there to explain what he means by this statement.
As for Guy, It’ll be interesting to see him lead the panel, as, I believe, he can see and address both sides of the topic and dive right into the hot button issues.
The rest of the panel are well informed folks on marketing, social media, and PR who will add valuable insight on the subject.
This is not a panel to spout expertise… but a group of peers who we can dialog with.
@jeremy We can’t ignore this topic; having a forum/panel is a good place to start the conversation.
If the event proves to be productive, we’ll do more of them.
P.S. would love to see you at the event participating in the discussion.
Mark. 3 out of 5 of your panelists are HEAVILY connected silicon valley people. These are people to whom typical rules and behaviors of advertising, PR, marketing don’t truly apply.
Let me put it in another light: who do you have participating that will be the counter-point? Who is there who will validate the good things that a PR firm can do for a client? Who will represent the 99% of companies and individuals who are NOT highly connected with top bloggers, influencers, and technologists?
re “having a forum/panel is a good place to start the conversation. ” – except it’s already started, and is ongoing, and needs more varied participants
re “If the event proves to be productive, we’ll do more of them.” – how will you judge this? what is “productive” in this context?
re “would love to see you at the event participating in the discussion.” – if there’s a real forum for it, sure, but i don’t really want to be “one of those” audience members who tries to take over a panel. nobody likes that…
It doesn’t even matter what happened, at this point. The agency’s clients, as well as Apple, are seriously affected by this, and from now on I, for example, will be much more sceptical when browsing through the App Store reviews on any of the aforementioned companies’ apps.
I have always suspected certain companies to tamper with reviews every now and then, but you – especially as a PR agency – have to be a real bonehead to just go out and downright brag about doing this (in writing) during your initial discussions with a client.
The problem with this practice is that it gives much more weight to bad reviews.
Particularly because you know the bad reviews are real.
Except for the bad reviews written about competitors’ apps.
As several others have noted, the practice, despite the ethical pitfalls, seems to be the norm.
It’s like being surprised that to learn of Dean Howard (the Democratic National Congress chairman) writing a foreword for President Obama’s book, or something like that.
Should he go negative?
There is nothing unethical in writing the forward to a book when you use your own name. It is unethical to post anonymous reviews for products your being paid to promote.
What I find more outrageous is that certain developers are getting favor with Apple, while small independent developers get nothing.
Fraud? Give me a break. Astroturfing is morally questionable and is definitely dishonest, but it’s far from illegal. It’s an interesting story to read about, but I’m sure this company is far from being alone in writing positive reviews for their own (or client’s) products.
Oh well, if everyone’s doing it then this type of behaviour must be encouraged when exposed then..
Funny, I was JUST talking to my client about TRANSPARENCY yesterday.
This is PR, people, the bad side of it. This aspect of PR is what helped convince me to leave it as my first career years ago. (I was in healthcare PR before the FDA came down HARD on the pharma companies).
Yet today, I embrace the possibilities of connecting with customers, clients, et al. through Social Media to have actual conversations. As a Community Strategist I listen, share, and connect versus just broadcasting messages like in the OLDEN days.
But, there will ALWAYS be those looking for loopholes (what did YOUR tax returns look like? :-) ) and we just need to consider the source and learn to be a bit more, ok, a LOT more, cynical about the motivation behind providing certain info than we ever used to be.
Why MORE cynical? It’s a lot easier to look authentic these days. We all should consider the importance of the HOT word of the year: TRANSPARENCY now that it is SO easy to research the validity of info by tracking back on the internet.
REVERB got caught, but there are so many marketers (and companies themselves!) still out there that will keep doing this in every industry including music, food, beverage, cars, hotels, gadgets and on and on.
Yes, it’s disconcerting to know that people feel that they need to deceive to sell . . . especially if they know that others are also doing it. So . . .they do it, too, it works for them, until they get caught. And then they’ll figure out another way.
That’s why we should ALL look at reviews and such, whether online or offline: TV, Radio, Newspaper, Magazine, etc., with a grain of salt and then take the plunge and BELIEVE or not based on how authentic we consider the source.
I don’t always expound on issues like this, but this one hit a nerve and I will probably blog about it SOMEDAY soon.
Until then, feel free to follow me at pinedaferet on Twitter where I discuss social media, culture, biz dev with digressions into other interesting stuff.
Funny, I was JUST talking to my client about TRANSPARENCY yesterday.
This is PR, people, the bad side of it. This aspect of PR is what helped convince me to leave it as my first career years ago. (I was in healthcare PR before the FDA came down HARD on the pharma companies).
Yet today, I embrace the possibilities of connecting with customers, clients, et al. through Social Media to have actual conversations. As a Community Strategist I listen, share, and connect versus just broadcasting messages like in the OLDEN days.
But, there will ALWAYS be those looking for loopholes (what did YOUR tax returns look like? :-) ) and we just need to consider the source and learn to be a bit more, ok, a LOT more, cynical about the motivation behind providing certain info than we ever used to be.
Why MORE cynical? It’s a lot easier to look authentic these days. We all should consider the importance of the HOT word of the year: TRANSPARENCY now that it is SO easy to research the validity of info by tracking back on the internet.
REVERB got caught, but there are so many marketers (and companies themselves!) still out there that will keep doing this in every industry including music, food, beverage, cars, hotels, gadgets and on and on.
Yes, it’s disconcerting to know that people feel that they need to deceive to sell . . . especially if they know that others are also doing it. So . . .they do it, too, it works for them, until they get caught. And then they’ll figure out another way.
That’s why we should ALL look at reviews and such, whether online or offline: TV, Radio, Newspaper, Magazine, etc., with a grain of salt and then take the plunge and BELIEVE or not based on how authentic we consider the source.
I don’t always expound on issues like this, but this one hit a nerve and I will probably blog about it SOMEDAY soon.
Until then, feel free to follow me at pinedaferet on Twitter where I discuss social media, culture, biz dev with digressions into other interesting stuff.
sorry for the double reply. it said application error so I resubmitted . . .sigh . . .
I’m just an app store consumer. Reading this makes me very unhappy. The comments by some justifying the practice of posting fake positives because everyone is doing it makes me sick to my stomach. Fraud is fraud, even if everyone is doing. There is little hope for America if people can’t judge right from wrong. Actually, the comments are more amazing than the story in some ways.
As for Reverb and Apple, I think there is enough here to warrant a Justice Department raid and full scale investigation. People have been misled and Apple, which has given the impression that they heavily police the app store, has a lot of explaining to do.
I buy apps based on ratings and I trust that Apple is policing the ratings to ensure that fake ones don’t influence others. They seem make it damned hard for apps to even get in the store so why would I think anything different.
An app the starts off with three or four 5-star reviews is likely to continue to get great reviews. People don’t like to buck a trend and Reverb would know that.
I can see huge class actions flowing from this.
Kudos to TechCrunch for doing this story. This is real journalism, even if it is infused with personal comment. The facts are the facts and you’re entitled to react to them on a personal level.
Where is Paul Carr? At the root of this and most internet problems is anonymity. This fraud will continue forever till people realize that anonymity is eroding trust and communication on the internet.
As a PR professional, this is extremely disheartening to me. I guess on some level we all know this happens, but this is a great reminder that this kind of activity just isn’t acceptable.
Some have suggested that it’s PR professionals’ job to position their clients in the best way possible through legal means. I would agree to an extent, but I add “ethical” to the list of qualifiers. For me, this rules this kind of activity out.
I have had clients ask me to write reviews for them, and have refused (and explained the rationale). Why? Because refusing protects them from articles like this. Something that hasn’t been a focus here is that numerous companies have engaged an agency to perform this task for them. As a PR professional, I consider exposing a client to the risk of being featured in an article like this to be completely unprofessional. I haven’t had a single person push back after explaining this.
Also, I want to go to sleep at night knowing that I’ve done the right thing.
PR agencies don’t all use the tactics described here.
You make a great point, Dave. The end goal is to get the client favorable publicity. If you do something unethical, the risk of backfire would work counter to your goals.
Question though: if a relative added a new app to the app store, would it be unethical for you to post a positive review of it? Ulterior motives abound.
I guess it would be more above board if the PR agency paid people to review the app, but told them they could review it any way the saw fit. If the agency saw that their people legitimately didn’t like the app, they would stop them from posting reviews. But if their in-house reviewers genuinely like the app on its merits, helping it get more positive reviews isn’t much different from giving people free product samples so they’ll tell their friends.
Thoughts?
The point is they are paid reviews. The developer pays the PR firm to post fake positive reviews.
There is no way to be ethical except perhaps to disclose that the reviews were paid for by the developer, which was not done in this case.
No matter how much you try, you can’t justify this. It’s designed to mislead, which is fraudulent. If this practice is as rife as people say, then the authorities have no choice but to do a huge payola-style investigation.
Dominic, The practice IS rife . . .across the board throughout any industry that can have a product/service reviewed. The “authorities” have their work cut out for them.
As for Chris’ comment that “helping it get more positive reviews isn’t much different from giving people free product samples” . . .Yes, it is different. If you receive a free product sample, you do not HAVE to give a review unless you sign something that says you agree to that or it is implicit in the arrangement somehow.
It would be unethical if you DON’T reveal that it’s your relative’s app, just as reporters reveal that they used to work at the company their article is referring to, or their father works there now or some such.
Dave Fleet, you are an ethical businessman, but there are those and will always be those who are unethical and will encourage you to follow along because everyone else is doing it. I agree with you Dave. Not only is it wrong. If you get caught it could be the end of your career, your business, your client’s business . . .
Ben, Customer reviews don’t DEFINE success of a sale, they AFFECT the success GREATLY depending on the product. Plenty of restaurants have closed down due to the FINAL NAIL in the coffin of a bad review in a major paper. Paradoxically, there are places that get horrible reviews and are mysteriously still alive and kicking because they fill some crazy niche or need in the market.
“The end goal is to get the client favorable publicity.”
Wouldn’t the end goal be to get the client favorable publicity ethically?
“If you do something unethical, the risk of backfire would work counter to your goals.”
If it’s just the concern for ‘backfire’ that would prevent someone from using an unethical type of PR, that’s pretty sad.
Jonathan – I think the risk of backfire for the client is *one* reason not to engage in this sort of behaviour. As I noted earlier, the desire to sleep soundly knowing that I’ve done the right thing is another big one.
This is the exact reason why some people sneer when I tell them I’m in PR. If you’re not getting the results you desire from your social media tactics, then you need to re-think your outreach and engagement strategy. With the right community manager in place, good things happen organically, ethically and above all, transparently.
You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can’t fool all of the people all of the time.
Shame, shame! ~ she says, pointing her finger.
Can I ask a stupid question? If products today are driven by customer reviews, who needs PR firms? An if in fact it is true that customer reviews define success of a sale, isn’t it inevitable that PR firms would move into that space, what else is there left to do?
Ben – I could write an entire blog post to answer that question… in fact, I may do that. However, in summary, there are several reasons that PR firms endure:
1. PR is about much more than publicity. That’s one small part of PR. Other parts include issues management, events, stakeholder relations and much more.
2. Our firm views fostering communities as a part of PR. With a strong community formed around a company, you don’t need to pay people to review products; you can just openly ask (not pay) people in that community to leave their thoughts as reviews – good or bad. It’s honest, transparent and above-board.
My two cents.
Dickheads. With the lack of demos, that reviews are fairly helpful.
Fuck you, PR.
Gagan,
The lack of transparency clearly makes the hiring interns posting positive reviews wrong.
With that said, I think there’s a more interesting facet to the story if you revisit the topic down the road: the evolution of user-generated content (UGC) and the associated credibility quotient.
One of the previous comments mentioned the reviews on Amazon. If you scrutinize Amazon’s Grapevine program it’s a good example of the gray area that shadows UGC.
In a nutshell, companies pay Amazon a chunk of change to provide a select group of Amazon reviewers (called Grapevine reviewers) with product who then go away and write reviews.
Now to Amazon’s credit, they disclose the reviewers who are part of the Grapevine program with a “vine voice” designation next to their name like Hyun Hu at http://www.amazon.com/gp/pdp/profile/AY5IL05TZPIZO/ref=cm_cr_pr_pdp.
But they don’t exactly let the buyer/consumer know that these reviews are one generation removed from a pay-for-play (company pays Amazon and Amazon gets the reviewer to put out the review).
While Amazon doesn’t have involvement in the ultimate content from the Grapevine reviewer there’s probably an implied message to be positive. Would be interesting to see what percent of the Grapevine reviews are negative versus positive. Obviously, companies aren’t going to pay Amazon for a consistent stream of negative reviews.
As a communications professional I think the broad topic of how people trust information in the virtual world is damn interesting. I’m continually surprised that the average consumer doesn’t seem to take more ownership to scrutinize the “context” of a given product review. I bet 90+ percent of the buyers on Amazon have no clue about the “vine voice” designation. If they did, perhaps they wouldn’t care.
In this Amazon example, one could argue that everything is out in the open and it’s up to the consumer to figure things out.
What about a company encouraging its happy customers to write reviews on Amazon.com for no reward? Hard to say there’s anything wrong with this.
Now what if that same company starts to offer these special customers unique touchpoints in the company and perhaps flies them to the HQ once a year for a powwow that includes time with the CEO. Are their reviews now tainted?
Companies fly journalists and bloggers to events all the time. Some disclose such an arrangement and others don’t.
As a consultancy with the agenda of promoting our clients and their products, it’s a never-ending process trying to figure out what’s right and what’s wrong.
Based on the evidence here the behaviour of this PR firm is downright despicable. And people wonder why PR has a bad name? Charlatans like this damage the reputation of an entire industry.
Sadly, not surprised in the least. We’ve received several pitches to our blog recently offering us compensation in exchange for positive reviews of mobile apps on the iTunes store.
It’s not only unconscionable in my mind, it’s an insult that I would sell out trusted readers who often use reviews to help guide purchase decisions. I wish I had the balls you do to post their emails up on site.
And people wonder why the FCC is getting involved with social media.
Is there a broader and potentially more important implication here? The tide toward direct expression, through App Store reviews, user group comments and even this blog comment, has lifted a critical filter in the traditional information flow from company to PR to public: the media.
Before the arrival of the myriad communications means for companies (and their PR firms) to speak directly to constituents, a buffer existed. Reporters decided whether a story was credible and reasonable before it made it into print. Even Letters to the Editor were screened. Much of that barrier is being eliminated in today’s world. So how surprising is it that someone is taking advantage?
I’m reminded of Michael Corleone’s PR strategy to assuage public concern about his impending murder of a police captain: “A dirty police captian who got mixed up in the rackets and got what was coming to him. We have newspaper people on the payroll, Tom? They might like a story like that?” When the story-teller can be corrupted by money (agency fees or download dollars) the ethics get invariably murky.
For all the love of freedom of expression that ‘user-generated’ content offers, we seem to forget that the traditional news organizations vetted this kind of gamesmanship. So, as many play violins while those news organizations burn, look at this story for what could be your alternative.
The vetting process traditional media has applied to content prior to distribution is why the vast majority of are conditioned to believe everything they read on the web.
It’s bad enough when manipulation of product reviews happens with games or books. Imagine the results when done with health-care or financial products & services.
Who knows what state traditional media outlets will end up in, but as the general public becomes more aware of review fraud and other questionable practices on the web, the relevance and need for credible, impartiality and properly vetted content will increase.
I really disapprove this kinda behaviour but doesnt that happen everywhere not only in the PR industry.
Similar things happened/happens at digg, where topdiggers get paid a couple of thousand to submit a story there.
To be honest i dont believe that some topbloggers wouldnt take the money if they get paid a lot to post a story or a press release. I remember that one of the bigger blogs mentioned evernote about 6 times in 2 weeks. That was a pretty high frequency, i still remember the comapny although i dont use app.
So you’ll never know unless some one speaks.
I am sure we will get to hear some more about this topic soon enough…
False positive PR only works in the very near term. Ultimately the product has to stand on its own. If the product does not perform as described subsequent buyers will make their disappointments known. Unhappy customers tell many more people of their experience than do happy customers.
From what I have read here Reverb has not/did not post reviews at odds with the general public’s assessment. Sounds to me like Reverb contracts with quality firms that make quality products, and provides the products developed by those firms a firm positive push. After that the market’s real perception of the product takes over.
Disclaimer: I have never worked for a PR firm in any capacity, nor have I ever been employed by a firm that contracted with a PR firm. I am currently retired with no plans to change that status.
Great article. Please post a list of all of Reverb’s clients, or as many as possible. Outing them will stop developers from using Reverb.
http://www.reverbinc.com/ourclients/
You don’t really mean to tell me that all you “network geniuses” just figured it out that there is a certain degree of manipulation regarding message boards, blogposts, or anything that contains user generated content do you? I’ve got a big orange bridge to sell you if that’s the case.
Caveat emptor my friends, the blogosphere has created a world unto itself populated by a million “experts” (i.e. idiots with a computer) that have flooded the web with content & criticism for anything & everything from consumer goods, software, network devices, political views & even restaurant reviews (can’t even trust Yelp anymore with all staged comments btw.)
If you are upset by this going on then boo fucking hoo! You are either just too stupid to have not thought about this yourself sooner or didn’t do your homework & got hoodwinked.
There’s a sucker born every minute Gagan & you’re this hour’s whiner… er I mean, winner.
We tell our clients one simple truth. The best PR is a good product. Period.
I deal with PR companies all the time and used to work in PR. I don’t really see what the big deal is, it’s just another tactic that they use. Should they be more transparent, of course, but is it as bad as you guys are making it out, no. There are 50,000 Apps in the app store and the only way to get any kind of notice is to get people to review it. As someone who runs website knows, no one wants to be the first one to review something.
It isn’t like Apple allows you to review the same product multiple times. So if a PR Firm has 5 or 10 people reviewing an app to get it noticed, so what? Now if they had hundreds of interns gaming the system, I think that might be different. But if it’s a small number then big deal. But hey, I’m sure some enterprising person will figure out how to turn this into an Outsourced gold mine. Something akin to people Goldfarming in games.
I also think it’s laughable that Tech Crunch is lambasting a PR firm about ethics when earlier this year you made a big deal about how you will no longer honor Embargos and will agree to them and then go ahead and break them – all because “everyone, else does it.” I happen to be one who adheres to all embargos and my site has never become hugely popular because of it.
I just went through my phone, noted all of the apps that I have purchased that were connected with Reverb, and sent an email to support stating I’d laike a refund due ot fraud.
You should do likewise.
and my spell checker didn’t work . . . wonder if it was a Reverb hyped plug-in . . .
There’s only one logical thing to believe in this day and age:
Any “review” or “rating” system, anywhere, is going to be gamed for someone’s advantage. ALL OF THEM. No matter what site it is, or what they’re selling.
You can’t stop it. Shut down an astroturfing company like Reverb and ten more will take its place tomorrow. There’s too much money involved.
I’m not saying it’s right. I’m saying that’s the way it is.
Read these “reviews,” on the iTunes App Store or elsewhere, and judge them accordingly. Caveat emptor.
While it’s hardly the most ethical of moves I’ll bet there’s a lot of people out there thinking a) ‘thank God it wasn’t us’ and b) ‘the crime wasn’t in doing it but in getting caught’.
Is it right that they do this? No. But let’s not kid on that it isn’t common. False reviews and ratings (posted by people with a connection to a client/company) appear all over the place.
Also – and it’s well unlikely – perhaps they really do like all these apps… :-)
Erbo is right: if you think that the anonymous crowd is any less biased, twisted, or otherwise sponsored by forces beyond your control, understanding, or endorsement then, well, you’re just another victim consumer.
Welcome to a world without authority and accountability. Catching a PR firm is the least of our problems.
I know it’s right because I’ve seen it happen before.
Second Life used to have a “user ratings” system, in which Residents (the term for SL users) could rate other Residents positively or negatively in various areas. Residents with sufficient positive ratings received a bonus to their weekly stipend of Linden Dollars.
This system was gamed out the wazoo. People would just get other people to mutually rate them up, gathering in groups to achieve the required “score” to get the bonuses. Linden Lab was forced to eliminate the rating bonuses, and, in fact, eventually eliminated the entire rating system, as it was effectively useless.
The only difference here was that commercial PR firms weren’t involved; the stakes weren’t high enough. As we can see from this example, when “real money” is involved, it gets much worse.
I have to say that while I’m disturbed by everything I’ve read, I also think people need to start thinking for themselves. This happens everywhere in every industry across the board. People need to do their research from multiple sources and not rely on a single source…ever. For all the complaining in the comments I’ve so far, this is nowhere near justifying a justice department raid. If you think that, then you need to get some perspective. And for those who negatively lump the entire PR industry as the evil empire, grow up. Not every PR firm does this, and if you believe otherwise, then you’re just as bad as the shillers. For all the complaints about indie devs not getting the marketing they deserve for their apps and games, the fact is that most devs don’t know how to market themselves legitimately or otherwise. I hear many indies complain about how they don’t get any attention. The fact is that the majority of apps and games in the iTunes store is really crap, and the reality is that the good ones will eventually get attention they deserve. But that doesn’t happen automatically. For the whining about how Apple doesn’t help them market, the blame lies solely with devs who don’t market themselves. Honestly, this whole shill review story while worthy of coverage will undoubtedly be used by indies as another excuse for why their apps or games don’t get coverage.
On that note, if you want to spin this around, you could say that TechCrunch shills for Twitter since Twitter-related coverage seems to the norm here…just about everyday. I think TechCrunch is a good information source, but my point is that as a consumer, don’t rely on a single source for information because you are just asking for trouble.
Stunningly egregious practice. It’s beyond unethical.
This is not PR. This is desperate flailing by those who fail to grasp who we are and what we do as communications professionals.