Italian Competition Authority launches a public consultation on proposed guidelines for online reviews

Consumer reviews influence billions of purchasing decisions every year. But how many of those ‘5-star’ ratings are actually genuine? The Italian Competition Authority (Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato – AGCM) is stepping in with a set of guidelines that redefine the obligations and responsibilities of businesses.

Anyone who has ever searched for a hotel on a booking platform or chosen a restaurant based on online comments knows just how decisive reviews can be. In this regard, the AGCM has often intervened to curb practices likely to distort consumers’ economic behaviour and undermine their ability to make truly informed decisions.

The time has come to raise the bar. In order to ensure that online reviews are reliable and come from people who have actually used the product or service being reviewed, the authority has been called upon to adopt specific guidelines to guide businesses in implementing appropriate measures. The mandate stems directly from Article 21 of Law No. 34 of 11  March 2026 (the "Annual SME Act"). 

The document drawn up by the AGCM (Draft Guidelines aimed at guiding businesses in adopting appropriate measures to ensure compliance with the legality requirements for online reviews) is not yet final, as it is currently subject to public consultation: all interested parties may submit their reasoned comments by 15 July.

Scope of the guidelines

The guidelines are designed to ensure a high level of consumer protection, and their scope is deliberately broad. Although the Annual SME Act aims to combat unlawful online reviews relating to products, services and facilities offered by catering businesses and establishments in the tourism sector, the authority has expressly stated that the guidelines provide an interpretative framework which, in principle, also applies to any other product or service sector.

The guidelines are aimed at all traders (wherever they are established) who direct their business activities towards Italy, when they make features or services available for the publication of online reviews. This includes traders who offer the goods and services being reviewed, as well as those who provide services for the publication or management of reviews relating to goods or services offered by third parties.

The definition of a "review" is intentionally broad, referring to any judgement, opinion or assessment expressed online, in any form, by consumers, in relation to goods or services or to the quality and performance of the professional offering them.

Transparency first and foremost

Under the guidelines, traders should provide consumers with clear and easily accessible information on how reviews on their channels are published, managed and categorised, as well as on the criteria used to classify them as "verified" or "authentic". This information should be made available on the same interface where the user can read the reviews, including via a clearly identified link.

This means that consumers must be able to understand, while reading the reviews, how they were collected and verified. The practical implication of this is significant.

Consumers should always be provided, in a clear and prominent manner, with information regarding the methods by which the trader collects or obtains reviews; any objective, relevant, representative and verifiable criteria the trader uses to select which reviews to publish; and the methods used to calculate average scores, specifying whether these are influenced by incentivised reviews or other types of contractual relationships.

Practical measures: verification, traceability, detection of anomalies

The guidelines identify three categories of measures that traders should adopt to ensure that reviews are genuine. The AGCM specifies that the specific measures adopted may vary depending on how the review service is designed and on the business model adopted by the trader (for example, large platforms with a high risk of fraudulent activity and greater resources could employ more sophisticated means than smaller traders to combat the phenomenon of inauthentic reviews, including the use of artificial intelligence systems followed by human review of the content).

• Verification of purchase or use

These are tools designed to verify that the consumer has actually used or purchased the product or service being reviewed, such as, for example: (i) requesting tax or accounting documentation proving the purchase, or an order/booking number; (ii) sending the consumer, to the email address they provided at the time of purchase, a link to submit a review only after the order has been completed, delivered or used; (iii) collecting the review exclusively within the customer’s private area, in the "orders/bookings/completed transactions" section; (iv) collecting the review via dedicated channels secured by QR codes or one-time password (OTP) systems.

• Author traceability

This category includes all tools designed to make the author of reviews traceable, such as author registration systems on the platform and IP address verification.

In short, total anonymity is becoming difficult to reconcile with new regulatory expectations, at least as far as traders are concerned.

• Automated anomaly detection

Finally, traders should equip themselves with automated tools to identify fraudulent activity by detecting signs of anomalies, such as a large number of reviews posted in a short space of time from the same IP address and repetitive linguistic patterns.

The AGCM specifies that the detection of an anomaly does not justify immediate removal: the system should not automatically remove the review, but should make its publication subject to a further verification, which should be carried out promptly.

Prohibition on manipulation: pohibited practices

The guidelines do not merely prescribe what to do, but explicitly list what is prohibited. Traders should refrain from engaging in practices designed to manipulate reviews, such as removing negative reviews, providing pre-filled templates for positive reviews, or presenting aggregated ratings based on criteria that are not explicitly stated or are not transparent.

In practice, even a simple post-purchase message such as "If you are not satisfied, please contact us before leaving a negative review" could fall within the scope of practices designed to manipulate reviews.

Incentivised reviews: lawful, but subject to strict obligations

One of the most sensitive areas is that of so-called incentivised reviews, being those in which the business offers something in return (a discount, a free gift, early access) in order to obtain a review. Such practices are not prohibited outright, but particular care must be taken to ensure that the content of the reviews is not influenced by the incentive provided and to guarantee that consumers are clearly informed that the reviews have been incentivised, regardless of the method used and the benefit received.

Absolute ban on buying and selling reviews: no exceptions

According to the draft guidelines, traders should not solicit or commission the writing or submission of inauthentic reviews, nor should they provide financial or other incentives that predetermine the content of the reviews.

This provision follows the ban introduced by the Annual SME Act, which covers the purchase and sale, for any reason whatsoever – including between business owners and intermediaries – of online reviews, ratings or interactions, regardless of their subsequent dissemination.

All traders involved in a chain of distribution of fake reviews are also liable under Article 23 bb-quater of the Consumer Code, as this is a commercial practice considered misleading in all cases.

The guidelines specify that the ban does not affect agreements under which a trader makes genuine reviews collected by another trader available to consumers on its own online interface, provided there is adequate information on the methods of collection and guarantees of authenticity.

Osborne Clarke comment

The AGCM’s draft guidelines mark a cultural as well as a regulatory shift: online reviews are now regulated, subject to obligations of verification, transparency and traceability. For businesses, the challenge is not only to adapt technically, but to rethink the entire architecture of review collection and management with a view to compliance.