Are Yelp check-ins a conflict of interest?

The concept of “checking in” to a location using a web-based service is not new. Brightkite, Foursquare, and Gowalla have all been doing this for quite some time. But ever since Yelp has joined the fray, I can’t help but feel awkward about it.

We’ve now added the ability for yelpers to “Check-in” to businesses. Active users of this feature may receive “Regular” status of highly-frequented businesses.

This sounds great on the surface. Users who are already visiting restaurants and businesses simply indiciate that they’ve physically visited the location. It becomes fun and almost a game, much like Foursquare or Gowalla, to be one of the top patrons (Mayor or Top 10, respectively) or one of the most active users amongst your friends (Leaderboard).

But I feel this is where it gets sticky (emphasis mine):

Yelp is all about community – we have never put emphasis on any one voice or opinion. In line with that philosophy, we opted to highlight a group of people who frequent a business as opposed to just one person. “Regular” status can be achieved by frequent patronage – or checking in – of a business. This title will show up on a user’s profile, next to reviews and tips and on the business page in the iPhone app, as well as eventually on that business listing on Yelp.com. The Regular with the most Check-ins will not only be featured on that business page, but get to wear the golden badge of honor. The moniker can also be lost if patronage wanes, so Regulars must visit a business often to keep it.

Sure, the check-ins and ‘Regular’ badges are, again, a fun “lightweight” way to interact with Yelp. But, those who do check-in regularly and provide favorable ratings seem to confuse the impartiality of a review. You’re not going to be a “Regular” at your 1-star venues are you? No, so this will become a form of rating inflating (as ‘Regulars’ are likely visiting their top-rated establishments).

I understand that someone who visits the coffee shop three times may have a more well-rounded perspective of the businesses service, food, and experience (compared to someone who had one awesome or one terrible experience). But, along the lines of Foursquare, which offers “Mayor Specials“, its arguable that frequent visitors (or Regulars) may be given preferred treatment. Perhaps not explicitly, but in the way that you start to get to know the guy behind the counter on your fourth visit. Or perhaps you really get to know the bartender… but maybe not the bar? What happens to your “Real Reviews” then, Yelp?

Sure, the individuals who are ‘Regulars’ are not a secret. They are clearly indicated and you can take their reviews with a grain of salt. And sure, before, these people would have received the same treatment and written the same reviews. But, now there is more incentive to visit regularly and write reviews.

So what about when Yelp starts mixing in the Sales & Special Offers variable? If I only visited a bar because I was getting a free drink, does that change my overall expectations and, ultimately, my review? Deals for “Regulars” is certainly something to stay away from.

I don’t know, maybe this is not a major concern to Yelp. But having chatted with Alex, I’m sure I’m not alone in wondering about this. There is arguably some potential for conflicts of interest in the form of preferable treatment and new incentive to visit regularly and write (impartial?) more reviews.

4 thoughts on “Are Yelp check-ins a conflict of interest?

  1. Cory O'Brien

    You make a good point, and one that I hadn’t considered before. At first, it just made sense that Yelp would want to have a way of verifying who is a regular and who is not, and geo-location seemed like a natural extension of their restaurant review service.

    However, when things like deals and specials are getting awarded to the regulars, then (as has already been seen on Foursquare) the top user’s actions can change to try and keep the giver of those rewards (in this case, the restaurants) happy. I wonder if they’ll put it some sort of system to try and combat the issue?

    Reply
    1. Devin Reams Post author

      Not only will the restaurants be happy, but either way, “Regular” reviewers will continue to be highlighted. And you’re never a regular at a place you hate, right?

      Reply
  2. Tom Ortega

    Not only that, but Yelp needs to realize it’s not a social network for the point you mentioned. It’s a service that would be a great part of a grander social network, but we don’t really need Yelp friends or check-ins. That’s not their core service or competency. The sooner they realize it, the better off they’ll be.

    Reply
    1. Devin Reams Post author

      Agreed. It’s interesting to see how these “niche” social networks continue to expand. This is the reason we need more “Open Social” so that it’s not JASN (just another social network).

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *