单选题 Skeptical of advertisers" sales pitches, shoppers are putting more trust in online consumer reviews of products from electronics to pet food. With rising trust, however, has come corruption. On Amazon. com, for instance, a suspiciously high 80 percent of reviews give four stars or higher, says Bing Liu, a computer scientist at the University of Illinois at Chicago who studies the inauthentic-review problem. Since most consumers don"t write reviews unless they have criticisms to share, "who on earth are these people who are so happy?" he asks. He estimates that about 30 percent of Web reviews are fraudulent.
One example. Staffers at Reverb Communications, a Twain Harte, Calif., public relations firm, posed as consumers and praised clients" products at the iTunes store before settling Federal Trade Commission (FTC) charges of deception in 2010. Now, organizations are battling back with new technologies to detect fake reviews. "It"s basically an arms race," says Mr. Liu, whose university team is building software to catch fake reviewers. "We have algorithms [to identify false reviews], and then these guys are inventing ways to avoid these things."
At stake is the integrity of a 21st century confidant. 70 percent of global consumers trust online consumer reviews, up from 55 percent four years ago, according to a Nielsen survey released earlier this year. Meanwhile, the fraction that says it trusts paid television, radio, and newspaper ads has shrunk to just 47 percent.
Spotting fake reviews means discerning signs of a faker. One who"s gushed about multiple refrigerator models at various websites probably hasn"t bought and tested them all, Liu explains, but is instead being paid to praise. Likewise, when hotel reviews come from guests who received discounts in exchange, their "Love! Love! Love!" should be taken with a grain of salt, salt, salt.
But researching each reviewer"s background would require more time and patience than most readers have. Even the FTC, with some 60 staffers who police advertising, lacks resources to enforce rules governing online reviews. The agency instead focuses on educating businesses about legal boundaries.
"We"re never going to be able to stop all false advertising," including false consumer reviews, says Mary Engle, the FTC"s associate director for advertising practices. "It would be great if there were some technological innovation that would help solve the problem, or at least put a dent in it." Faced with human limitations, pioneers are betting technology can fix what it helped create (or at least exacerbate).
Consider Yelp. com, a site where readers find more than 30 million consumer reviews of everything from restaurants to doctors. Reviewers must register, which helps weed out robots, according to Yelp. It discards apparent shills and malicious attacks on competitors, as well as reviews that seem to have been solicited by business owners. Some legitimate reviews may be tossed out in the process, since the filter isn"t perfect, Yelp says.
At the University of Illinois at Chicago, researchers are targeting reviewers rather than reviews. Programs in development track a reviewer"s Internet Protocol address to see what else he or she has been reviewing. Is that person generating dozens of reviews on various sites every week? Does every review from this particular source crow—or pan? Programs sniff out suspicious patterns by sifting through data so voluminous that only a computer could do it.
Until tech solutions arrive, consumers need strategies for finding trustworthy reviews. Try relying on large samples, says Linda Sherry, director of national priorities for Consumer Action, a San Francisco-based nonprofit advocacy group. If dozens or hundreds of reviewers are raving, then the consensus might be more trustworthy than a small handful of glowing options. And don"t worry too much, she adds, because the market has ways of weeding out troublemakers. "You can"t lie forever" without being found out, Ms. Sherry says. "We"re all the cops on the Internet in a way. It"s our eyes that really keep it honest—if it can be. "
单选题 The passage is mainly about ______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】[解析] 对文章主题的归纳能力。本文探讨的主题是网上评论的造假问题,作者就网上评论的现状、造假方式及人们的应对策略等进行了分析。选项C较好地概括了文章主题,为正确答案。其余三个选项所涉及的内容在文中仅有提及,但均未详述,更谈不上是文章的主题。
单选题 By saying that "Likewise, when hotel reviews come from guests who received discounts in exchange, their "Love! Love! Love!" should be taken with a grain of salt, salt, salt" (para. 4), the author is trying to express that ______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】[解析] 根据上下文正确理解句子的能力。对此句的理解应基于上文相关内容。从第四段首句就可看出,这一段是在探讨如何识别网上的假评论,作者接着便列举了两种常见的造假方式,其目的当然是为了提醒大家,那些看起来夸张、热烈的赞美很可能有问题,因此消费者在看到这样的评论时最好细心分辨,谨防上当。选项B的说法过于肯定;选项C则偏离了文章的思路和主题;选项D的理解出现了逻辑错误,得到折扣的客人写的评论可能有问题,但并不能由此推断出,没得到折扣的客人写的评论就没有问题。
单选题 The word "police" in the sentence "Even the FTC, with some 60 staffers who police advertising, lacks resources to enforce rules governing online reviews" (para. 5) can best be replaced by ______.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】[解析] 根据上下文正确理解词语的能力。原句位于第五段。从第二段的例子可知,FTC的全称是Federal Trade Commission,由于其曾对涉嫌欺诈的公司提出指控,因此推断这是一个贸易监管机构,从而可判定选项B为正确答案。其余选项的含义均与本文语境不符。
单选题 Which of the following CANNOT be true about the developing technologies to combat review corruption?
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】[解析] 对文章基本内容的理解。文中提到的对付虚假评论的技术手段主要有Yelp.com网站运用的技术和由the University of Illinois开发的程序。四个选项也是针对以上两种技术手段的特点和用而设置的。考生只需仔细推敲选项并与原文比对即可确定D
单选题 About online customer reviews, we can know from the passage that ______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】[解析] 对文章基本内容的理解。各选项中需要考生判断的信息散布于文内各处。由第一、三两段可知,人们对网上评论的信任度在提升,而且信任者的比例也较以前有所增加,选项A和B应排除。选项C正确,可依据文章末段作出判断。文章介绍了Yelp.com网站和the University of Illinois 开发的用于对付虚假评论的技术,他们采用的方法均能较为有效地过滤虚假评论,选项D错。