FTC Holds Online Fashion Brand Accountable for Suppressing Negative Reviews, Issues Updated Guidance for Marketers, and Warns Review Platforms
Time 2 Minute Read

In the first FTC case to challenge a company’s failure to post negative reviews, the FTC has reached a proposed settlement agreement with the online fashion retailer, Fashion Nova, LLC, prohibiting the retailer from suppressing negative reviews and requiring the company to pay $4.2 million for harm suffered by consumers.

The FTC’s administrative complaint alleges that Fashion Nova misrepresented that the product reviews on its websites accurately reflected the views and opinions of customers when, in fact, from 2015 to 2019 the retailer used a third-party customer review interface to manage reviews, publishing only 4- and 5-star reviews and filtering out hundreds of thousands of customer product reviews receiving below 4 stars. This is the second time Fashion Nova has entangled itself with the FTC. In 2020, the company paid $9.3 million to settle charges that it failed to properly notify consumers of late shipments and give them the chance to cancel their orders, and that it illegally used gift cards to compensate consumers for unshipped merchandise instead of providing refunds.

In the current case, in addition to prohibiting misrepresentations of product reviews and endorsements, the FTC is requiring Fashion Nova to retroactively display all product reviews that were submitted to its website, including all reviews previously withheld from public view, for products currently for sale on their website.

The FTC’s order carves out reviews that are unrelated to Fashion Nova’s products or that contain unlawful, profane, obscene, vulgar, or sexually explicit content, so long as the criteria for withholding such reviews is applied uniformly. In addition, Fashion Nova will not be required to provide the opportunity to submit reviews for every product offered for sale on its website.

In connection with this action, the FTC sent letters to 10 third party review management companies notifying them that avoiding the collection or publication of negative reviews violates the FTC Act.

This ruling follows a continuing trend of FTC crackdowns on misleading advertising, reviews, and endorsements. Retailers should be vigilant to treat all reviews equally, solicit reviews neutrally, and responsibly outsource third-party review management. The FTC issued two new guides for businesses on soliciting reviews, one directed to marketers, the other to online platforms. These documents cover best practices for review collection, review moderation, and review publication; both should be studied carefully by retailers who incorporate consumer reviews into their marketing strategy.

You May Also Be Interested In

Time 3 Minute Read

The FTC has made its position on violations of “Made in USA” standards clear, and Williams-Sonoma received an expensive repeat reminder. On Thursday, April 25, the agency announced a settlement with the home goods retailer, directing it to pay an unprecedented civil penalty of $3.175 million for violating a 2020 FTC order requiring the company to clearly and accurately identify which products are, in fact, made in the USA. “Made in USA” denotations, as pointed out by the FTC, are more than formality: rather, to label something as “Made in USA,” the business must adhere to specific criteria – namely, that the product’s final assembly or processing, and all significant processing, takes place in the US, and that all or virtually all ingredients or components of the product are made and sourced in the US.

Time 3 Minute Read

In January 2023, the FTC announced a proposed rule that would ban employers from imposing noncompetes on employees. After collecting over 26,000 public comments during the 90-day notice and comment period, the FTC announced a special Open Commission Meeting set to take place on Tuesday, April 23, 2024 to discuss the implications of the proposed rule. While closed to public comment, the public is still able to view the meeting via webcast. 

Time 4 Minute Read

Last week, the FTC sent high profile warning letters to two trade associations, the American Beverage Association (AmeriBev) and the Canadian Sugar Institute, and 12 registered dieticians regarding inadequate disclosures in the dieticians’ social media posts. While the specific influencer posts varied across dietician, they all related to the safety of aspartame, an artificial sweetener, and other messaging regarding the benefits of consuming sugar-containing products. Further, some dieticians even went so far as to call the World Health Organization’s warnings regarding aspartame and artificial sweeteners as based on “low-quality science” and “clickbait” evidence. While some of the dieticians included words like “#Ad” or “Sponsored” in their posts, according to the FTC most failed to provide obvious disclosures informing consumers that they were watching an ad that had been paid for by an industry association. The FTC’s warnings alleged that inconspicuous messaging surrounding these partnership deals led to consumer confusion regarding who ultimately was responsible for the influencers’ nutrition messaging. And according to the FTC, the fact that these influencers are registered dieticians increases the public’s confidence in the information they disperse, thus heightening the need for them to be clear about their partnership affiliations.

Time 2 Minute Read

The FTC took action last week against a group of New England-based clothing accessories companies for making false claims that certain of its products were “Made in USA.”

Search

Subscribe Arrow

Recent Posts

Categories

Tags

Authors

Archives

Jump to Page