Looking To Monetize Consumer Comments? Here’s A Really Bad Idea For How To Do It

Written by Evan Schuman
May 16th, 2010

With thousands of customer comments being posted on products on many of the largest retail sites, the temptation can be quite strong to try and find a way to monetize that information, beyond merely enjoying stronger product sales. But one very popular news community—called Topix—tried an impressively horrible idea and got slapped down for it by the attorneys general of 23 states and U.S. territories.

What Topix did was tell its users that it would remove abusive or inappropriate posts. So far, so good. But it then started to charge $19.99 to perform a “priority review,” to make the removals happen sooner.

Anyone else get the feeling that a non-priority removal is going to take an awfully long time? Maybe the police should adopt a similar approach? “We’ll respond to all crimes. But for an extra $20, your violent-crime-in-progress complaint will be prioritized.”

“We are calling on Topix to abandon its outrageous pay-to-police policy and I urge consumers to join us in telling Topix to stop exploiting pain and abuse on its site,” said Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal. “Forcing victims to pay in exchange for promptly stopping abusive, obscene and harassing Internet posts is exploitive financial bullying. The perpetrators, not victims, should be charged this unconscionable fee for making false or abusive posts.”

Blumenthal was joined by the AGs for Kentucky, Arizona, Arkansas, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Washington. It was also supported by the AGs representing Guam and the Northern Mariana Islands.

The issue here is not really what Topix did as much as how it reflects the desperation of online sites today to monetize Web activity however it can. We’ve heard some far-fetched ideas—albeit not as offensive as what Topix is accused of doing—from some substantial retailers about ways to leverage an audience.

Some e-tail sites attract substantial numbers of visitors who have no interest in buying but instead come for the entertainment the site offers. In difficult economic times, few revenue ideas are rejected out-of-hand. Let’s hope the Topix situation reminds many that there do have to be limits.


One Comment | Read Looking To Monetize Consumer Comments? Here’s A Really Bad Idea For How To Do It

  1. dresolve Says:

    Why did Topix stop there, with just one level of payment, a $19.99 charge for “priority review”?

    A system of tiers could be implemented:

    No fee – When you have a chance please look in to this matter and evaluate whether this possibly offending comment can be removed
    $19.99 – “priority review” (whatever that means)
    $29.99 – I really need this to be removed as soon as possible
    $99.99 – GET THIS COMMENT REMOVED IMMEDIATELY! Among other things, my spouse, family and friends really DO NOT need to read spurious allegations of my infidelities, hiring undocumented workers and fixing junior high school basketball games.

    A similar system could be implemented in the corporate world. When a sign off on a project plan is needed by a controller or some other muckety muck, and you know that it can’t wait several days for approval, just pay your $100 bucks and get it bumped to the front of the queue. The folks at are on to something.

    On another note, never really looked at before, there’s something to the old adage that “any publicity is good publicity”


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.