Editing 1036: Reviews
Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
The edit can be undone.
Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
| Latest revision | Your text | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
But the rest of the comic shows how difficult shopping has become after reviews have become easily accessible on smartphones while standing in the store. And now this takes up the final three panels, with the result that no lamps have been acquired and they decide to sit in the dark, using the claim that their living ''room looks fine in the dark'' to avoid buying a very expensive lamp which is the only one with perfect reviews (like 100% with 5 stars out of 5). | But the rest of the comic shows how difficult shopping has become after reviews have become easily accessible on smartphones while standing in the store. And now this takes up the final three panels, with the result that no lamps have been acquired and they decide to sit in the dark, using the claim that their living ''room looks fine in the dark'' to avoid buying a very expensive lamp which is the only one with perfect reviews (like 100% with 5 stars out of 5). | ||
| β | When shopping for anything via {{w|reviews}}, whether it be electronics or even something as simple as lamps like the comic demonstrates, one negative review can spoil a lot of positive reviews. That hits home even more if the review is specific because humans attach more weight to anecdotes and specific stories. This comic points out the absurdity of paying attention to those reviews, by making the negative review itself absurd (a lamp making your cats go deaf and interfering with your taste buds would imply, at the very least, anomalous | + | When shopping for anything via {{w|reviews}}, whether it be electronics or even something as simple as lamps like the comic demonstrates, one negative review can spoil a lot of positive reviews. That hits home even more if the review is specific because humans attach more weight to anecdotes and specific stories. This comic points out the absurdity of paying attention to those reviews, by making the negative review itself absurd (a lamp making your cats go deaf and interfering with your taste buds would imply, at the very least, anomalous radiation, and would not be on store shelves long before some kind of serious recall). |
The second part of the comic starts normally. For the lamp Cueball thinks is pretty Megan finds ''lots'' of negative reviews which implies the product really isn't good after all, and it was even that specific brand of lamps in general that was to be avoided. But then this proceeds to get more and more absurd to the title text. Cueball is for instance looking at a lamp that someone thinks looks like a {{w|uterus}}. If Cueball did not feel the same way, he should ignore one person's comment. On the other hand, reading such a statement will maybe make you think of a uterus every time you see the lamp. So now it may be best not to buy it, but had he not read the comment it might have been a fine lamp for him. | The second part of the comic starts normally. For the lamp Cueball thinks is pretty Megan finds ''lots'' of negative reviews which implies the product really isn't good after all, and it was even that specific brand of lamps in general that was to be avoided. But then this proceeds to get more and more absurd to the title text. Cueball is for instance looking at a lamp that someone thinks looks like a {{w|uterus}}. If Cueball did not feel the same way, he should ignore one person's comment. On the other hand, reading such a statement will maybe make you think of a uterus every time you see the lamp. So now it may be best not to buy it, but had he not read the comment it might have been a fine lamp for him. | ||
