The Difference Between Review Manipulation and Fake Reviews
Most UK businesses understand that fake reviews are illegal. Fewer realise that manipulating real reviews can be treated the same way in law if it misleads consumers.
Why This Distinction Matters
Under the Digital Markets, Competition & Consumers Act 2024, it is unlawful to create, commission or host fake or misleading reviews [DMCC Act, 2024]. The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has confirmed that selective review collection, suppression of negative feedback and biased display of ratings are also prohibited if they distort the overall impression [CMA Guidance, 2025].
What Counts as Fake Reviews
Fake reviews are the most obvious form of review abuse. They involve reviews written by people - or, increasingly, software - who never actually used the product or service.
Common examples include:
- Paying third-party “review farms” to bulk-post 5-star ratings
- Asking staff, friends or family to leave reviews under false names
- Using AI tools to generate “human-sounding” reviews
- Posting negative reviews on a competitor’s behalf
- Replicating the same review text across multiple platforms under different identities
All major platforms ban this activity, but the legal position is now much stronger: It is a standalone offence to create, buy, sell or host fake reviews in the UK [DMCC Act, 2024].
The intent does not matter. A business is liable even if an employee “meant well” or an external supplier acted without clear approval [CMA Guidance, 2025].
What Counts as Review Manipulation
Review manipulation is more of a grey area and until recently wasn’t explicitly unlawful. Manipulated reviews are left by real customers, but the way their feedback is collected or displayed creates a biased picture.
Typical examples include:
- Sending review invitations only to customers already known to be happy.
- Timing review invites to moments of peak satisfaction
- Filtering dissatisfied customers into private communications instead of public platforms
- Offering incentives for customers who leave 5-star ratings
- Steering customers toward the platform where the brand has the highest score
Nothing here is technically “fake” - but the end result is now considered misleading.
The CMA treats this as a misleading commercial practice because it distorts consumer decision-making in the same way fake reviews do [CMA Guidance, 2025].
Why Manipulation is More Common than Fakery
Most UK businesses are not buying fake reviews. However, many still use legacy “review optimisation” processes designed to inflate scores rather than reflect reality.
Two behavioural dynamics fuel this:
- Customers are more likely to leave negative reviews than positive ones [Harvard Business Review, 2020]
- Satisfied customers rarely leave reviews without being prompted[Spiegel Research Center, 2017]
So the “natural” review profile is:
- Low volume
- Negative-leaning
- Not commercially useful
That is the review gap - and some businesses try to close it by controlling the flow of reviews.
Evidence of Commercial Impact
The pressure to manipulate reviews exists because reviews affect revenue:
- A one-star increase on Yelp is associated with 5-9% higher revenuefor independent restaurants [Luca, Harvard Business School, 2011]
- Displaying reviews increases conversion by 190% for low-priced itemsand 380% for high-priced items[Spiegel Research Center, 2017]
- Pages with five or more reviews see 270% higher conversion than pages with none [Spiegel Research Center, 2017]
- A 0.1-star improvement can lift local conversion by around 25%[Uberall, 2022]
- 78% of UK consumers say customer reviews influence them; 72% say star ratings do too [Trustpilot & London Research, 2023]
This is why manipulation became normalised - but the law has now caught up with the behaviour.
What the CMA has Made Clear
The regulator has set out three non-negotiable principles:
| CMA Position | What it means in practice |
|---|---|
| Responsibility is non-delegable | Businesses remain legally liable for the authenticity of their reviews on third-party platforms. |
| Fake and manipulated reviews are treated in the same way | Whether a review is invented or selectively presented, if it misleads consumers it is unlawful. |
| Historic manipulation still counts | Legacy review manipulation that continues to bolster current scores must be investigated and, if necessary, corrected. |
Bottom line: the age of “review management” is over. The legal duty is now transparency and fairness to customers.
✓ What Businesses Can Do
A compliant review strategy needs evidence of fairness. Key questions businesses will need to ask themselves include:
- Are all customers invited to review, or only selected segments?
- Do public review scores match internal satisfaction data?
- Are review processes the same across all platforms?
- Is there a written policy for review handling?
- Can the business prove it has taken “reasonable and proportionate” steps?
- Is there an external audit trail in case of a CMA investigation?
If the answer to any of these is “not sure”, the business is exposed.
Why Independent Authentication is Now the Safest Route
The legal duty is not just to “have great reviews” - it is to prove the overall picture a business presents to the public is fair, representative and non-misleading.
That is why many brands are now turning to independent review verification.
Independent review authentication delivers:
- Cross-platform analysis - not just what is shown on your own site, but what customers see everywhere.
- Detection of both fakery and manipulation - including suppression, bias, and historic inflation.
- Audit-ready evidence packs - for regulators, investors, boards and internal governance.
- A defensible position - if questioned by the CMA, the media or competitors.
- A visible trust signal - demonstrating that the review profile has been independently verified, not curated.
Final takeaway
Fake reviews are an obvious offence. Review manipulation is a common one.
Under UK law, both now carry the same risk if they mislead consumers.
The question for every business is no longer “Do we have a great score?”
It is “Can we prove our reviews are authentic, complete and fairly collected?”
If the answer is unclear, the risk is real - and visible to others before it is visible internally.
Written by Daniel Mohacek on November 3, 2025
