B

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

Mon, May 3, 2021 5:40 PM

Fake ratings and reviews

Last night I watched a movie right after it came to Amazon Prime in the UK. I checked the IMDb score and it was >9, which was suspicious, but I guess it had only been shown to friends and festival audiences... Overnight the score has dropped to less than 5. I wonder if the IMDb algorithm is broken or someone is actually trying to sabotage an indie film VOD premiere? I find it hard to believe that more than a dozen viewers (all after midnight) were so upset that they rushed straight to IMDb to give ratings of 1 and 2, yet nobody has reviewed it on Amazon Prime... Why doesn't IMDb do anything to cleanse fake ratings and reviews? 

Responses

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

4 d ago

Weighted Average Ratings

IMDb publishes weighted vote averages rather than raw data averages. 

The simplest way to explain it is that although we accept and consider all votes received by users, not all votes have the same impact (or ‘weight’) on the final rating. 

When unusual voting activity is detected, an alternate weighting calculation may be applied in order to preserve the reliability of our system. 

To ensure that our rating mechanism remains effective, we do not disclose the exact method used to generate the rating. 

See also the complete FAQ for IMDb ratings.

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

@Karen_P thanks for the generic answer

The question is why does IMDb give more weight to the dozen fake reviews posted BEFORE or immediately after the film's premiere? Is there an army of IMDb-backed trolls available to ruin film's ratings ahead of their premieres?

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

That's quite common when the statistics are first compiled. It settles out after the voting gets north of 10,000 votes. So the rating comes up over time. You know how it is. The complainers always are ahead of the people that praise something. That's the way of life in general!!!

:):)

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

thanks @Karen_P 

So basically nothing will change

One thing is people complaining because they don't like the film but another thing is people banding up to sabotage a film before it has even come out and IMDb helping their cause by giving their reviews more weight

Who will even watch the film now with such a disastrous score?

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

It's quite the opposite. Those 1 votes carry less weight. If they were actually calculated as "Actual" 1s, the real average would be even lower. The weighted average detects attempts at persons manipulating voting with new accounts and voting a title a 10 or a 1. So those carry "LESS" impact.

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

I agree this is how it should work. However, it seems like the 7 quickfire 1s and 5 2s, have a lot more weight than all the other older ratings

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt10484276/ratings?ref_=tt_ov_rt

These are probably not new users, just users with many ratings and reviews who have been specifically tasked to give 1s and 2s in the night before the release. How is that not suspicious to IMDb?

These users have even upvoted this obviously nonsensical review which should have never been approved by IMDb in the fist place: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw6874951/?ref_=tt_urv

There should be some protection against hit jobs like this

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

It may seem that way, but it is not. If you give a vote of anything other than a 10 or a 1...... that carries more weight. To the uninitiated it is hard to wrap your head around. The simplest way to explain it is that although we accept and consider all votes received by users, not all votes have the same impact (or ‘weight’) on the final rating. 

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

It's just simple Math

The Arithmetic mean = 8.3, that's considering all 113 votes

If we exclude the 10s and the 1s (which would already be unfair as the 10s have been there for a while and the 1s were just given the day before the the release), we get a mean of 5.7

This means the 7 1s have A LOT more weight than the 75 10s

Understand the 10s were probably given by cast, crew and friends, but the 1s, 2s and 3s were obviously given by trolls

So why do the trolls get IMDb's backing?

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

Sorry. It's not "Simple Math"

There are no "excluding" the 1 and 10s in IMDb's formula. It can give a 1 or a 10 vote. a .5 or a .7 or give a 10 a 9.2, 9.5, or a 9.0. The formula is a secret. So you will never know exactly the formula. It is on a sliding scale. Not a fixed one!

Your trying to simplify a complicated algorithm.

You cannot make "ANY" conclusions by what your trying to do.

When unusual voting activity is detected, an alternate weighting calculation may be applied in order to preserve the reliability of our system. 

To ensure that our rating mechanism remains effective, we do not disclose the exact method used to generate the rating. 

(edited)

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

When unusual voting activity is detected, an alternate weighting calculation may be applied in order to preserve the reliability of our system. 

To ensure that our rating mechanism remains effective, we do not disclose the exact method used to generate the rating. 

That's fine and well done for having the right idea.

However, this clearly didn't work here.

If you have a rating of 9.4 and it changes to 4.7 based on 7 1s within a few hours, then CLEARLY these 1s are:

- not detected as unusual voting activity, which they are

- given more weight

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

Sorry. You cannot grab the concept.

IF those are regular longtime registered voters, then they are not considered AS unusual.

They think it stinks. And it is their right to vote it so.

The system works.

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

You don't seem to get the point that these reviews came in hours before the film's release. How do these longtime registered voters manage to form an opinion that the film "stinks" without watching it. What is really remarkable is the extent to which you can pretend you don't understand the issue here... The system definitely works in terms of ruining small indie films that will never get thousands of reviews because their ratings have been sabotaged before their premieres. 

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

Sabotage only happens because of the persons that the producer, director, or whomever, have pissed off, seek to extract their brand of justice. It is the right of any registered IMDb member to vote on a title on it's day of release. Whether you "Think" it's broken, when it is not.

Maybe people should not be so abrasive that make films.

This does not happen on a regular basis to all indie films. It is not the fault of IMDb, nor should IMDb protect these persons from what they created for themselves.

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

I seriously doubt IMDb will be proud of the way you speak on their behalf

- assuming the film stinks

- assuming the producer/director have made enemies

Why can't you just address the point that the reviewers had no way of seeing the film before it was released. I repeat, not the day of the premiere, the day BEFORE. 15 people giving 1s and 2s the day before the premiere is how IMDb normally works, really?

To be honest this is really shameful. Filmmakers spend years making something happen, sacrifice everything, then get attacked by trolls, get no protection from IMDb and then get attacked by an IMDb spokesperson whose job is to try to resolve issues.

I've never had worse experience with any product.

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

Read below. The "FAKE" 10 votes got you!

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

3 d ago

And I see your issue.

It is not the 1 votes that triggered the weighted average. No sir.

It is the oh so obvious manipulation of the persons that voted this a 10.

Those are what destroyed your average. Those "FAKE" 10 votes.

You actually "DO NOT" have an issue with the 1 votes causing the ratings drop.

The 10s destroyed it.

This is where you know very little about the weighted average.

You could take away those 1s totally and your film would be rated at best a 5.8-6.2

Those phony 10s got you!
If those individuals voted your title honestly then your film would probably be a 7.0 or above!

9 Messages

 • 

150 Points

I already explained to you a few hours ago that if we exclude the 10s and the 1s, we get a mean of 5.7, not 4.6.

You said neither the 10s, nor the 1s are excluded. 

Now you are saying the 10s are phony, but the 1s are not?

I don't understand the logic and you seem to be getting too emotional, so let's just leave it at that. 

FYI this is the rating a few days before the premiere (yes, it is not surprising that people who saw it at the festivals and the actual friends of the film gave it 10s)

 

I think representing a brand like IMDb with accusations of indie filmmakers is not a very good practice. Please think about this before sending your next message

(edited)

Karen_P

4.3K Messages

 • 

58.1K Points

I represent no one.

This an open forum.

I'm an actress that's been around for three decades.

Been doin this a while.

I know "HOW" the system works and have an overall understanding of the weighted average system

It is not broke.

It works.

The Fake 10 votes messed up this title.

You cannot comprehend it.

So be it.

IMDb will erase all this eventually ad leave a canned reply in it's place.

You have the explanation.

I could care less how you wish to interpret anything from this point on.

You have been given more insight than IMDb will ever give you.

Have a nice day!
:):)