The rotten side of Rotten Tomatoes

   We're all familiar with what currently seems to be the most heavily accepted 'movie stamp of approval': The 'Certified Fresh' tomatoes from Rotten Tomatoes. Problem is, that tomato is not as 'fresh' as we're told.

A composite of the Rotten Tomatoes site and how scores are calculated. I had to Google the calculation information, which was not easily found on the site. :(

   As we just found out from the recent events surrounding Venom, A Star is Born, and now First Man, the tomato scores seem to be weighed weirdly and easily influenced. I'll mostly be focusing on Venom, it's scores, and the interesting situation involving Lady Gaga fans.

   I remember an ad for Thor: Ragnorok saying something like 'critics and audiences agree, Thor is 'Certified Fresh.' It then flashed the RT seal. The set up and wording is suggestive of the score being an average. But if that were the case, then why is Venom, an 88% from fans, still listed as 30% and not certified fresh? Upon doing some digging of my own, I found out that the tomato score is not an average of pro and audience reviews like media would have us believe. The score is only based on the professional critic reviews.

   This is incredibly misleading. Especially to the Lady Gaga fans who thought they could influence Venom's score by writing loads of fake reviews. This was done because her film A Star is Born released the same day. Hoping that the fake bad reviews would cause Venom to be easily out performed in the box office, fans flooded the site to leave their negative comments. The joke ended up being on them as Sony's Marvel movie easily pulled the bigger numbers.

   The one thing that this event seems to scream is that the site and it's audience scoring system could be easily swayed. While I don't know if the fake bad reviews were ever removed, I do know that if this could easily occur, other such instances of falsely influenced scores could happen. Companies could easily have a team that poses as multiple accounts to go in and inflate their scores or tank those of their competitors. This means that trusting the score alone is not the best idea.

   This problem could easily happen in other peer review areas, such as the popular subsection of YouTube known as BookTube. While, as of now, most reviewers there are honest for the most part, they aren't fully unbiased. They receive ARCs, or advanced reader copies of books. Some may receive notes telling them that negative reviews will be challenged by the companies, which have much more cash at their disposal then the vloggers. The companies can also infiltrate the comment section if they so choose as well.

   All in all, open peer review sites are too easily influenced. The best option? To know for sure if you like the book or movie, you'll have to see it or read it yourself. And don't think you're under obligation to finish. There's no shame in asking for a refund if it's not to your taste. And if that true, then you are fully entitled to leave a negative review.