The gallery facing fake online reviews: monitoring and protecting your reputation

01The online review ecosystem applied to the art world

Galleries are listed on Google Maps, TripAdvisor, Facebook, Yelp and numerous other platforms that collect public reviews. This presence is generally not the dealer's doing but results from the automatic creation of listings by platforms that index commercial addresses from public databases. The dealer thus finds themselves being evaluated without having sought this exposure and often without being aware of it for the first months or years.

The problem of fake reviews affects every sector of commerce and services, but it takes on a particular dimension in the art world for several reasons. The first relates to the subjective nature of the gallery experience: a visitor disappointed by an exhibition may write a negative review reflecting an aesthetic disagreement rather than a service deficiency. The second stems from the small size of the milieu: a dealer who declines to represent an artist, turns down a collaboration proposal or wins a market sought by a competitor may become the target of malicious reviews written under pseudonyms. The third concerns the international clientele of galleries, which makes monitoring reviews published on local platforms in different languages particularly complex.

02Identifying fake reviews: warning signs

Detecting fake reviews relies on observing several converging indicators. A review written by a recently created account, with no profile photo and no history of reviews for other establishments, warrants particular attention. A review that mentions no concrete detail about the gallery, the exhibition visited or the works displayed suggests its author may never have visited. A review whose vocabulary and style appear modelled on other negative reviews targeting the same establishment may indicate a coordinated campaign.

Fraudulent positive reviews are equally problematic, though dealers pay them less attention. The purchase of positive reviews, a widespread practice in the hospitality and restaurant sectors, is beginning to affect the art world, particularly among certain spaces that function more as event venues than as art galleries in the strict sense. A sudden flood of effusive reviews written in similar style and published within a short timeframe constitutes a warning sign that can harm the establishment's credibility in the eyes of informed visitors.

Galerie Perrotin, present in several cities worldwide, faces a considerable volume of online reviews requiring regular monitoring. Galerie Thaddaeus Ropac, with spaces in Paris, Salzburg, London and Seoul, must monitor platforms in several languages and jurisdictions. These leading galleries have integrated digital reputation management into their routine practices, testifying to the importance the subject has acquired in the daily management of an art space.

03Legal remedies and reporting procedures

The dealer confronted with a fake review has several levers available. The first is direct reporting to the platform concerned. Google, TripAdvisor and Facebook have reporting procedures that allow requesting the removal of a review when it violates the platform's terms of use, particularly in cases of defamatory content, manifest conflict of interest or fictitious reviews. These procedures are often lengthy and their outcome uncertain, but they constitute the first available recourse.

In France, the 2016 Digital Republic Act and the Consumer Code impose transparency obligations on online review platforms, including indicating the date of the review, the ranking criteria and the possible existence of review verification. The dealer may invoke these provisions to obtain the removal of manifestly fraudulent reviews. In cases of characterised defamation, judicial recourse is possible under the law of 29 July 1881 on press freedom, which applies to online publications.

04Building an active monitoring strategy

Online reputation monitoring cannot rely on occasional and random checking. The dealer must implement structured surveillance covering the main platforms where their establishment is listed. Setting up Google Alerts on the gallery name and its artists' names enables rapid detection of any new online mention. Claiming Google Business Profile and TripAdvisor listings allows receiving notifications for each new review and responding directly on the platform.

Galerie Kamel Mennour, located in the sixth arrondissement of Paris, benefits from significant footfall that generates a regular flow of online reviews. Galerie Nathalie Obadia, with spaces in Paris and Brussels, must ensure bilingual monitoring of its digital presence. These examples illustrate the diversity of situations dealers face and the need to adapt the monitoring strategy to each gallery's size and geographic footprint.

05Responding to reviews: the art of digital diplomacy

Responding to reviews, whether positive or negative, constitutes a delicate exercise that the dealer should not neglect. A negative review left without response gives the impression that the dealer is indifferent to visitors' opinions. An aggressive or defensive response produces an effect worse than no response at all. The appropriate tone is one of professional courtesy: thanking the visitor for their feedback, acknowledging the possible inconvenience without admitting fault that may not have been committed, and inviting the person to contact the gallery directly to resolve the issue.

Responding to positive reviews is equally important. A personalised thank-you, mentioning for example the exhibition visited or the artist appreciated, reinforces the bond with the visitor and shows future readers that the gallery values every response. This simple practice helps humanise the gallery's online presence and counterbalance the effect of any negative reviews.

06Prevention over cure: encouraging authentic reviews

The best defence against fake reviews is to encourage the publication of authentic reviews by satisfied visitors. A substantial volume of positive, detailed reviews mechanically relegates negative or suspect reviews deeper down the page, reducing their visibility and impact. The dealer may encourage visitors to leave a review by placing a discreet reminder at the gallery exit, including a link to the Google listing in digital communications or personally thanking visitors who have taken the time to share their experience.

This approach must never cross the line into abusive solicitation or fake reviews. Asking employees, artists or their relatives to write laudatory reviews under pseudonyms would constitute a fraudulent practice that, if discovered, would cause damage far exceeding the expected benefit. Authenticity is the only viable long-term policy for digital reputation.

07Digital reputation as a component of gallery value

In an art market where trust forms the foundation of every transaction, the gallery's digital reputation has become a component of its overall value. A collector considering a first purchase from an unfamiliar gallery will probably consult online reviews before crossing the threshold. An artist hesitating between two galleries for representation may be influenced by the public perception conveyed by online reviews. An international curator discovering a gallery at a fair will check its Google listing to learn more before making contact.

For Artedusa partner galleries, the platform offers a professional presentation space that complements and enriches the gallery's digital presence. By bringing together works, information about represented artists and gallery contact details in an art-dedicated environment, Artedusa helps strengthen the dealer's online credibility and offers collectors a reliable reference point, sheltered from the vagaries of generalist review platforms.