While don't condone the seller's/manufacturer's actions, I sort of agree with one of the commenters and with Amazon:
The Amazon product review is for a review of the PRODUCT, not a review of the seller. Saying (hypothetically), in a particular review, that a given product gets 1 star because _one_ seller of that product delivered it late, delivered it broken, etc. ... is not fair a fair representation of the product itself. And, therefore, it is an inappropriate review _of_the_product_. It's a great review of the company, and a lousy review of the product.
Reviews of the sellers belong in a different place (for which, I believe, Amazon also provides a place to make those reviews). There's some grey area in this one case because the seller (and unethical actor) happens to be the manufacturer. But, what about re-sellers of the product who might get stuck holding stock for a good product that has a bad review, because the bad review isn't about the product at all? The manufacturer isn't getting punished here, the re-seller is. And not because they bought a bad product to resell.
I think the proper thing here is to err on the side of "Product reviews go with the product, seller reviews go with the seller". And, thus, Amazon was right. Though, maybe they should have been better about communicating all of that with the OP.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
no subject
While don't condone the seller's/manufacturer's actions, I sort of agree with one of the commenters and with Amazon:
The Amazon product review is for a review of the PRODUCT, not a review of the seller. Saying (hypothetically), in a particular review, that a given product gets 1 star because _one_ seller of that product delivered it late, delivered it broken, etc. ... is not fair a fair representation of the product itself. And, therefore, it is an inappropriate review _of_the_product_. It's a great review of the company, and a lousy review of the product.
Reviews of the sellers belong in a different place (for which, I believe, Amazon also provides a place to make those reviews). There's some grey area in this one case because the seller (and unethical actor) happens to be the manufacturer. But, what about re-sellers of the product who might get stuck holding stock for a good product that has a bad review, because the bad review isn't about the product at all? The manufacturer isn't getting punished here, the re-seller is. And not because they bought a bad product to resell.
I think the proper thing here is to err on the side of "Product reviews go with the product, seller reviews go with the seller". And, thus, Amazon was right. Though, maybe they should have been better about communicating all of that with the OP.