Yes but no but. Well, maybe. It's complicated.
In the era when the internet gives everyone their own personal soapbox either to damn or deify travel review sites have taken off like a homesick angel. TripAdvisor leads the pack with more than 290 million reviews and opinions covering more than 5.3 million properties and experiences. While these reviews also include restaurants and attractions, it's the hotels, resorts and other lodgings that are the site's forte.
A favourable review on TripAdvisor is the best free advertising a hotel, resort, bed and breakfast joint or backwoods guesthouse can get. It's a smile from the travel gods, a rock solid investment in a 24-carat future. Is it any wonder therefore that some hoteliers are prepared to game the system?
Fake, glowing tributes designed to dress mutton up as lamb are the most obvious ploy, but nastiness – hobbling rivals with negative reviews – is another handy strategy for the unscrupulous.
Glowing tributes can also result from inducements to guests. In Britain , a hotel in Cornwall was busted for offering 10 per cent off food and drink in the hotel's Fireside Restaurant and a 'free apartment upgrade' if guests agreed to become 'brand champions' and post an 'honest but positive view' on TripAdvisor. In this case detection and outing was a no-brainer – the offer came in the form of a letter from management to guests – but there are plenty of establishments that will make a similar offer verbally.
Negative reviews a problem? Why fix the problem when you can toss a bone to quieten the barking dog? In 2015, the ABC revealed in leaked emails from Meriton that the apartment-hotel group was offering a financial inducement to guests to delete negative reviews. In a further dance with duplicity, Meriton management warned that guests who complained during their stay were not to be sent TripAdvisor feedback forms from Meriton, with the implication that they might be tempted to air their displeasure to a wider audience.
TripAdvisor has a Review Moderation and Fraud Detection department that supposedly filters the fakes and ensures all is fair and above board but lies slip through. As do negative reviews from fake guests, posted as disinformation or revenge, which can remain on a hotel's review site for many days after TripAdvisor has been notified, mangling the property's reputation.
A mini industry of online reputation managers has sprung up to put a gold tint on what's said about them on TripAdvisor, and then there are the pranksters. In a classic 'whoops!' moment, in 2013 a hostel for the homeless in Glasgow soared to the top of the city's TripAdvisor rankings after rosy reviews of its non-existent spa and pool, posted by fake reviewers. This is one of the inherent weaknesses in TripAdvisor's modus operandi relative to some other review sites. While anyone can post a review on TripAdvisor, only a guest who has booked and stayed can post a hotel review on Expedia.
In Britain, the Advertising Standards Authority has ruled that TripAdvisor must not imply that all of its reviews come from real travellers, or were honest, real or trustworthy. As a result of that ruling, TripAdvisor deleted the phrase "reviews that you can trust" from its British website.
Small, family-operated properties rate better than TripAdvisor than big hotels that offer the same level of comfort, amenities and service. If you are shown to your room by Madame Dubois who will also serve your brioche with orange marmalade the next morning made by her own fair hands, you're far more likely to applaud longer, louder and in text than if it's a chain hotel.
As with all review sites, TripAdvisor attracts some who shouldn't be trusted with knife and fork. When a reviewer bleats because their $60-a-night hotel room lacks a balcony with view of the Eiffel Tower, the writer needs to get real.
While hotel managers who answer TripAdvisor reviews deserve applause, those who respond to negative reviews by hurling insults at the reviewer should not be working in any profession that deals with the public. If a guest posts a legitimate complaint that is echoed by others, management needs to apologise and fix the problem, not respond with a massive dummy spit. For examples of what not to do, Google "Alloggi Agli Artisti TripAdvisor".
Just because TripAdvisor falls short from time to time is no reason to toss it aside. If the occasional misstep was a hanging offence nobody would fly with Australia's budget airlines ever again. For the savvy traveller, TripAdvisor is a valuable, even an essential tool. If your hotel is currently under renovation, if the pool smells, if it's been invaded by mosquitos carrying the Zika virus management might not tell you, but you can bet other guests will on TripAdvisor. However TripAdvisor doesn't ask that you check in your brain when you check out their reviews.
Beware the single-review contributor. The more reviews a contributor has submitted the greater the weight their words carry. Same goes for reviewers with "helpful" votes, the more the merrier.
Reviews that diverge from the mainstream should be treated with suspicion. Some travellers ignore the top and bottom 10 per cent of all reviews in favour of those in the middle ground.
Recent posts are more likely to reflect the true state of affairs than older ones.
When you find somewhere that looks promising, cross reference your choice by checking reviews on Expedia and Hotels.com, which both accept reviews only from guests who've paid and stayed.
For any traveller looking for quality accommodation at a decent price TripAdvisor's reviews are useful, but – like a stock tip from the bloke in the next seat on the plane – a little scepticism keeps you safe and dry.
In general, I give TripAdvisor a cautious tick, but only in the hands of mature, rational adults.
See also: 11 mistakes every first-time traveller makes
