The Rise of the 'Webocracy'

If you're like me, you visit TripAdvisor before taking any trip and read all the product reviews on Amazon.com before buying anything online. In fact, I'll even read the online reviews of a product before going to a store to buy it. But who's to say that I should agree with all of the anonymous reviewers? Who are these people, and why should I believe them just because they took a few minutes to write a review?

In business school, I learned that if someone likes your product or service, they may tell one person, but if they hate it, they will be more likely to tell ten. Is this the thought behind online Tweets, comments, blogposts and reviews as well? The strange thing is that many reviews seem to be remarkably accurate and helpful. I have gone back to TripAdvisor reviews after staying at certain hotels and B&Bs and have agreed wholeheartedly with my new reviewer-friends.

Who am I to say that a teenager in Iowa, a sixty-old man in France and a 39-year-old woman in Maryland wouldn't have similar taste in, say, a 42" television--the next big purchase that I will definitely research online? The funny thing is that I often end up putting more stock in these reviews than I do the opinions of relatives, friends, and neighbors, who represent a very small sample of the opinions out there.

However, it's a lot easier to believe online reviews if there is more than one, or even two or three. I often find it more helpful for a site to rank results versus just giving a star rating (Digg.com comes to mind based on their Popular rankings and Upcoming rankings of just about any "news" on the 'Net).

But in the end, it is difficult to decipher the true motive behind any online reviews--good or bad. Earlier this week, Reuters reported that the FTC ruled that bloggers must disclose paid endorsements when discussing products or services. They must even disclose if the product has been given to them for free, a practice that has occurred in all other mediums for years without the same level of scrutiny.

In addition, some groups are starting to fight back against negative reviews. In March 2009, doctors began to fight back against anonymous online reviews. A company called Medical Justice promotes the idea that doctors should require patients to sign confidentiality agreements because of the harm that negative online reviews can do to physicians' practices and the physicians' inability to respond due to patient confidentiality laws. At the other end of the spectrum are the doctors who ask every patient to write a good review online if they had a good experience at their offices--using positive online reviews to attract new patients and build their practices.

All of these online "popularity contests" have led to what I call the rise of the Webocracy--digital media's answer to Democracy. It occurs in everything from AngiesList to RateMyTeachers to iTunes. I know the first thing I do on Twitter is to see how many Followers someone has. Certainly I was embarrassed when I first started out on Facebook and had only 10 friends (you know you worked to get over 100 friends on Facebook as quickly as possible too).

Of course, this makes things difficult for marketers who are constantly trying to appeal to the greatest number of people online and to even generate much-coveted "Online Buzz." The problem is that in giving everyone a voice, it's difficult to know the motives, tastes and personalities of the people giving the reviews.

Even the U.S. Founding Fathers decided that U.S. citizens couldn't handle a true Democracy and instead needed a Representative Democracy, where we vote for those people who will best represent our needs. A Free Press also helped people to be heard, but news and opinions were still filtered through editors, reporters, commentators, and the select few who could gain access to the medium. Now anyone can be heard with virtually no start-up costs (except access to a computer and the Internet) and begin writing blogsposts and reviews from virtually anywhere in the world.

The challenging goal is to cut through the clutter and gain a large following. Some do it through in-depth knowledge of a subject area, and others achieve it through an engaging and informative writing style. Still others look to shock and/or entertain better than anyone else. The sheer number of "participants" in this Webocracy challenges marketers to find new and inventive ways to get people to seek out and follow a particular online "voice," ranging from a singluar person to a large corporate brand.

And that's the latest Holy Grail of the Internet--the ability to gain readers, followers, friends and fans. It is causing a lot of chaos in the world of traditional marketing--the world of GRPs and CPMs. It is also creating a lot of heartache for the press--the people who went to Journalism school, worked their way up the editorial ladder and now find themselves competing with a 17-year-old writing a Blog in her bedroom in Poughkeepsie.

However, as member of the new Internet Webocracy, I enjoy writing the occasional negative review of a bad experience with a hotel or a positive review of a product that I have used and would recommend to others. And for the most part, I have benefited from what others have had to say. There is a certain power in giving everyone a voice, and I think that is the true appeal of this new digital frontier.