This content has been automatically translated from Ukrainian.
The internet was supposed to make us more informed buyers.
If ten years ago we could only rely on advertising or a friend's advice before making a purchase, today it is enough to open YouTube, Google, or Reddit - and find dozens of reviews. It seems that choosing has become easier.
But something strange (or not so strange...) has happened.
The more reviews appear, the less honest criticism there is among them.
I call this the complementary internet.
It is an environment where authors are much more often rewarded for praise than for constructive criticism. Not because all products have suddenly become perfect. But because this model benefits almost all market participants.
Sponsored reviews are just the tip of the iceberg
It is commonly believed that the problem lies only with sponsored reviews.
In reality, it is more complicated.
Even if a company does not require a positive rating, the author understands a simple thing: if today he harshly criticizes a product, tomorrow he may not be invited to a presentation, not provided with a new sample, or not offered future collaboration.
No one forbids anything.
The reward system simply works in such a way that a compliment is almost always safer than criticism.
And that is enough for self-censorship to arise.
The most important thing is the drawbacks
The paradox is that most reviews do a great job of talking about the advantages.
The processor is fast.
The camera is good.
The materials are high quality.
The battery life is decent.
But the buyer often already knows this from the manufacturer's advertising description.
The most valuable information is found elsewhere.
What starts to annoy after a month?
What compromises did the manufacturer have to make?
What has been poorly implemented?
For whom is this product definitely not suitable?
It is the answers to these questions that help make the right choice.
There are no products without drawbacks
Any product is a set of compromises.
A lighter laptop often has worse cooling.
A larger battery means more weight.
A firmer chair may better support the back, but some may find it uncomfortable.
A quieter fan may mean higher temperatures.
These are not drawbacks in themselves.
These are engineering solutions.
The task of a good review is not to say that the product is bad.
Its task is to honestly show what compromises have been made.
Then the buyer will decide for himself whether they are critical for him.
When everyone praises, the manufacturer also loses
At first glance, it seems that the complementary internet benefits companies.
After all, their products constantly receive positive reviews.
But this works only for a short time.
If the manufacturer stops hearing honest criticism, he loses one of the most valuable tools for development.
It is precisely thanks to constructive feedback that new revisions emerge, design flaws are corrected, software is updated, and service is improved.
Flattery creates a good impression.
Criticism creates better products.
Why we increasingly search for Reddit
Have you noticed that before a big purchase, many people add the word "Reddit" to their search? Reddit has long been common in the Ukrainian segment.
This is not a coincidence.
People are looking for a place where someone has already bought the product with their own money and is not afraid to write:
"After three months, the mechanism started to creak."
or
"Yes, there is a drawback, but it doesn't bother me at all."
Such reviews are often more valuable than ten professionally shot reviews.
Not because they are always accurate.
But because they more honestly show the real experience of use.
A good review is not a balance between positive and negative
Often you can hear: "For balance, you need to find at least a few downsides."
No.
The goal of a review is not to meet a quota of criticism.
The goal is to help a person understand the product.
If the product truly has almost no weaknesses - great.
But if there are, they cannot be hidden just because it may not please someone.
An honest review is not one where praise and criticism are equal.
An honest review is one after which the reader understands not only the strengths of the product but also all the important compromises.
We don't need criticism for the sake of criticism
The internet is not lacking in toxicity (hello Twitter / Threads 😂)
There are plenty of comments where everything is "terrible."
But toxicity has nothing to do with honest criticism.
Constructive criticism explains the reason.
It shows the problem.
It helps the manufacturer make the product better, and the buyer avoid a poor choice.
This is how a healthy market works.
The complementary internet is a world where praise has become more profitable than honesty.
In the short term, everyone is satisfied: companies receive positive mentions, authors get new collaborations, and algorithms get beautiful content.
But in the long term, everyone loses.
The buyer receives incomplete information.
The manufacturer loses honest feedback.
The author gradually loses the trust of their audience.
Perhaps the best review is not one after which you want to immediately hit the "Buy" button.
But one after which you can consciously answer a simple question:
"Am I ready to live with these compromises?"
Like it?React
🧵
This post doesn't have any additions from the author yet.
