Scottish Daily Mail

How Sports Direct blocks bad reviews on the web

- By Rupert Steiner Chief City Correspond­ent

A RETAIL chain blocked negative reviews of products on its website in an apparent attempt to boost sales.

Sports Direct cherry-picked positive comments made by customers, a practice consumer groups said was misleading and illegal.

The firm weeds out even the mildest criticism, a Daily Mail investigat­ion has found. One reviewer said of a £10 Lee Cooper zip jumper: ‘The quality wasn’t as good as I had hoped.’

This assessment was removed without proper explanatio­n.

Instead the reviewer was sent an email saying: ‘Please note that all reviews must apply to the specific product in question and any comments containing inappropri­ate or bad language will be removed.’

Shoppers who want to review clothing and equipment must submit their comments for approval by a modera- tor on the Sports Direct website. The moderator replies to say whether the review will be used.

But out of 15 submitted by the Mail for publicatio­n online, only two made it through the vetting process. Both were positive comments.

In another example of the firm rejecting negative remarks, it blocked a review of a pair of £29.99 Adidas Goletto trainers, which read: ‘These trainers were not as comfortabl­e as my last pair. Rubbed at the back.’

However, a moderator approved a positive review for a swimming costume, which read: ‘Bought this a couple of months ago and it’s brilliant. Real bargain buy and great quality. Thanks Sports Direct.’

The same moderator gave the green light to a glowing review of a pair of Firetrap Rhino boots costing £26. It read: ‘I bought this item for my son – it was just what we wanted and the price was great. I highly recommend it.’

If retailers distort online reviews they are in breach of rules contained in the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulation­s 2008 as well as advertisin­g codes.

A spokesman for the Advertisin­g Standards Authority said that deleting negative customer reviews and posting only positive ones might be in breach of the rules.

He added: ‘Crucially it could also be illegal. Businesses should think very carefully about cherry-picking customer feedback that paints them in a good light.’

The Competitio­n and Markets Authority also says sites that do not publish all reviews may be in breach of the law. Nisha Arora, a senior director of consumer enforcemen­t at the regulator, said: ‘We will take enforcemen­t action where necessary to tackle unlawful practices.’

UK consumers spend an estimated £23billion a year that could be influenced by online reviews, the CMA has calculated. Research shows that shoppers often trust online comments and use them as a key source of informatio­n before making purchases.

In June the CMA launched an investigat­ion into the abuse of website reviews. It said at the time: ‘We are concerned that... consumers looking at these review sites are getting a less complete picture of what reviewers have said about a business.’

A spokesman for the consumer group Which? said online reviews should be genuine and unbiased.

A Sports Direct spokesman said: ‘In response to recent CMA guidelines Sports Direct will continue the process of r eviewing and adapting its procedures.

‘Sports Direct is totally focused on providing the best brands at the best prices across the broadest ranges to millions of customers.’

The company, which is controlled by billionair­e tycoon Mike Ashley, has been rebuked by unions and MPs over its business practices, including high pay for executives and alleged poor treatment of staff.

‘Paints them in

a good light’

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom