"Sephora has very strict brand rules regarding our Ratings and Reviews, which we know are an important decision tool for our clients," the retailer says. Sephora was quick to address the matter with the brand, according to a statement given to Glamour. The issue poses a unique challenge to big-box retailers and e-commerce sites, some of which get thousands of shopper reviews a week. Lastly, we are actively listening and would love your constructive feedback on what you would like to see from us." They followed it up with a post tagged with #TransparencyxSundayRiley. "Second, we are going to have our business practices and company culture audited by a third-party and will publicly release the results. "First, you can be assured that the only way that our brand will communicate on all channels, including , is with our official brand badge," the brand said in the caption. A few days after the Reddit thread was posted, the brand took to Instagram. Sunday Riley, for its part, owned up to it. "If that is destroyed, a company can be seriously hurt." "Trust and authenticity are keys to buyers today, particularly millennials," says Russell Winer, Ph.D., a professor and the deputy chair of the marketing department at NYU Stern School of Business. The breakdown of that trust can have lasting effects. (Not to mention fake reviews could pose legal issues, though they're usually too small-scale for the FTC, which has strict rules regarding endorsements, to pursue.) Online beauty reviews require some level of trust-namely, that the reviewer actually used the product and is sharing their genuine opinion. The repercussions for these behaviors go way beyond a public shaming. This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from. (The reasoning behind this: The more reviews a product receives, the more popular and therefore more desirable it must be.) Studies have shown that just having a lot of reviews can actually boost a shopper's interest in a product-even if a comparable one with fewer reviews is of higher quality. Fake reviews are rampant within e-commerce, since online shopping eliminates the option of touching, testing, or swatching a product for yourself. That's exactly the problem-and not only in the beauty industry. ( Good Genes is often cited as one of the best exfoliating serums out there.) A lone nugget of honesty in the memo seemed to point to a rationale: "The power of reviews is mighty, people look to what others are saying to persuade them," one line read. The news came as a shock to loyal fans of the brand, many of whom wondered why it needed to take such measures given that the company's products are revered for their ability to transform your skin. The email detailed directives employees were given to hype up the brand's products in reviews, including talking points like, "please address how cooling it felt, the green color, the nondrying mask effect, radiance boosting, got rid of your acne after a couple uses," as well as instructions on how to set up a VPN, or virtual private network, to hide employees' identities. There it was: proof that the one of the biggest resources beauty shoppers use to solicit authentic and unbiased opinions was no longer such. "The priest asked if I had stolen anything at work, if I was late to my employment, if I did anything to harm my employer and if I had any bad intentions toward my employment.The following screenshot of an internal email had Twitter rumbling. "He asked if I had ever got pulled over for speeding, if I drank alcohol or if I had stolen anything," she said. Instead, the priest told her that he would ask questions "to get the sins out of me." In court documents, a server at the restaurant, Maria Parra, testified that she found her conversation with the alleged priest "unlike normal confessions," where she would talk about what she wanted to confess, according to a court document reviewed by CBS MoneyWatch. The Labor Department said an investigator learned from some workers that the restaurant owner brought in the priest, who said he was a friend of the owner's and asked questions about whether they had harmed the chain or its owner. According to the Labor Department, its investigation found that the company had denied overtime pay to workers, paid managers from money customers had left as employee tips, and threatened workers with retaliation and "adverse immigration consequences" for working with the agency, according to the agency. The restaurant chain's owner allegedly brought in the fake priest after the Labor Department started investigating workplace issues.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |