Writing effective reviews: techniques, tools and best practices

From buying a smartphone to booking a restaurant or choosing a movie to watch in the evening, reviews are the most immediate tool for gaining information about what to expect. We can say it without a doubt: online reviews have profoundly changed the way consumers and users approach decisions to buy and use products or services, and it is almost impossible to consider a purchase or “move” without first reading something online. Today, reviews are no longer simply personal opinions, but key content that influences purchase decisions and builds loyalty and credibility for products and brands. From a business perspective, having positive and accurate reviews exponentially increases trust in the brand or product, showing both the user and the search engines that that content is relevant, authoritative and useful. Also for this reason, Google has designed a specific algorithm, the Reviews System, which rewards sites that publish original, well-written reviews that demonstrate competence and authenticity. Therefore, it becomes necessary to learn how to write reviews that provide value to the reader and meet SEO criteria, so as to stand out in SERPs and reach a wider audience. So let’s find out how to write quality reviews for products, services, or experiences that become effective ranking and visibility tools.

What is a review

A review is a type of content that aims to express an opinion, judgment or analysis of something: it can be a product, service, experience or media work. Unlike a mere objective description, a review also incorporates subjective elements , i.e., the impressions and direct experience of the writer. However, these elements remain balanced by a critical analysis that is meant to inform and guide the reader.

Write perfect reviews!

With SEOZoom’s tools you have all the data you need to create useful and effective reviews for users and Google

Find out more

What distinguishes a review from other content is its ability to evaluate, justify and, above all, interpret the characteristics of the object in question, allowing the reader to form an accurate idea based not only on technical data, but also on how that data translates into practical, real-world experience. Reviews can be very varied in style and form, starting from blog articles, Google reviews or e-commerce platforms, to more formal content such as academic or editorial reviews. What remains central, in all forms, is the goal to inform and evaluate in a reasoned manner.

What are reviews for?

Reviews serve primarily to guide the reader, offering him or her the support needed to make a more informed decision. Thanks to reviews, the user can understand not only the features of a product or service, but also its strengths and weaknesses, which are often invisible on a first reading of data sheets or official descriptions. A good review focuses on the real advantages and possible disadvantages, contextualizing the reviewed item in relation to the reader’s needs or expectations.

The value of a review lies above all in being useful. Any review that offers factual, in-depth information based on direct experience gives the reader tools to evaluate what is best for him or her with respect to his or her own needs. Another important value is the contribution that reviews make to building trust: both between the consumer and the brand or product, and between the author of the review and those who read it. In fact, reviews are not only elements of conversion (think of a purchase) but also of loyalty, helping those who read them to choose with confidence and creating a relationship of trust between the parties.

From the perspective of companies, reviews are an invaluable source for understanding real user feedback-positive or negative-and improving their product or service accordingly. In addition, a continuous series of visible and positive reviews can significantly improve their reputation, attracting new customers and maintaining a solid presence in the market.

Where can reviews be found?

Reviews can be found in multiple contexts and on different platforms. Among the most common ones, e-Commerce portals certainly stand out, where users share their opinions about the products they purchase. Amazon represents a classic example, where users’ reviews are visible at the tail end of each product tab; but also on platforms such as TripAdvisor or Booking, related to restaurants, clubs, and hotels, reviews play a central role in guiding users’ choices.

A special role is taken by reviews embedded in Google search results, i.e., the so-called Google Reviews, posted directly by users on the Activity Profile page of a company or business. This type of review, accessible to anyone via search results or maps, has gained particular prominence in recent years due to the enormous visibility offered by the Mountain View search engine. Indeed, Google Reviews heavily influence not only the image of a business, but also its local ranking and trust score.

In addition to these large platforms, we find reviews on personal blogs or business sites, often used to share technical and more detailed opinions about certain products or services. These environments are typically run by professionals or enthusiasts in a specific field, offering in-depth, targeted reviews for an audience that is highly attentive to details and performance.

Although the structure and tone of reviews may vary depending on the platform on which they are hosted, their goal remains constant: to guide readers and potential customers toward a well-informed and thoughtful decision.

The various types of reviews and their purpose

Reviews can be categorized into different types based on the specific context and material covered. The main types of reviews include those related to:

• They are primarily geared toward analyzing the technical and practical characteristics of an object, whether it be electronic devices, clothing, automobiles, or other. The purpose here is to provide a clear comparison between what the manufacturer promises and the actual experience of use.
• Here the focus shifts to the quality of service provided, the relationship with the customer, and adherence to promises. Service reviews touch on large-scale areas: from catering, to technical support techniques, from the transportation experience to digital services such as online platforms.
• These reviews recount lived experiences, such as visiting a restaurant, taking a vacation, or staying in a hotel. The feedback here is deeply related to the emotional and practical aspect of the experience, from the quality of the food to the friendliness of the staff, the cleanliness of the rooms, and the attractions visited.
• Reviews covering movies, TV series, books, video games and other entertainment or cultural works. The purpose of these reviews is to provide a critical interpretation of style, storytelling, direction, and more, offering a reliable idea of what audiences can expect.

In all cases, at the ideal level the key purpose of each review is to enable the reader to make an informed decision, balancing objective information with personal opinions: does the product really work as stated? Is it worth the price? Does the experience live up to expectations? What plausible alternatives can be considered?

A good review answers these questions, going deep and providing useful, transparent, and complete answers.

Post reviews on your own site: how, why, when to do it

Posting reviews on one’s site is a key strategy for delivering valuable content to visitors, building trust , and improving a brand’s SEO visibility .

Indeed, posting reviews allows you to enrich your platform with researched content that meets the practical needs of your audience, conveying expertise and authority. But that’s not all: for many sites, reviews also represent an important monetization strategy , especially through the use of affiliate programs. However, sites that earn commissions for every purchase related to a product reviewed through affiliate links must be particularly careful about how they structure reviews, lest they incur Google penalties.

Reviews only yield SEO and affiliations if they are treated professionally and do not appear as purely promotional tools. This means that it is important to determine how to publish reviews to gain credibility and visibility, and when it pays to renew them to keep them current. Content management based on effective reviews also builds a stable source of traffic, especially if the content remains useful and relevant for a long time.

Which sites publish reviews?

Reviews find a place in numerous publishing contexts, which vary in their goals and mode of publication. Many personal blogs publish reviews to offer independent opinions on consumer products, travel, or services that the authors have tested; in particular, niche blogs-such as those devoted to technology, wellness, or food-attract audiences because of their authors’ combination of passion and expertise .

Digital newspapers and other news portals also publish reviews, geared more often toward specific products or particular experiences, such as film, theater or travel, and with a more formal editorial slant. Finally, there are specialized sites that publish in-depth reviews on a certain class of products or services, such as technology, automotive, or fashion, presenting buying guides and recommendations. These sites seek to position themselves as leaders in their field, aiming to provide technical and professional reviews , targeted at a very discerning and detail-oriented audience.

The difference between proprietary and third-party reviews

When we talk about reviews posted on one’s site, we need to make a distinction between proprietary reviews and third-party reviews.

Proprietary reviews are those written directly by the site operator or portal contributors, offering in-depth analysis and direct evidence based on the use of the product or service, and are constructed to offer a critical and personal experience. This content is designed to enrich the value of the site, themselves becoming vehicles for SEO traffic and tools to improve the platform’s authority .

In contrast, third-party reviews are those contributed directly by users, for example in e-Commerce feedback sections or on aggregated platforms such as Google Reviews or Amazon. These contributions can be useful for building an interactive community and generating engagement, but they are not always designed to ensure a high editorial standard, as is the case with proprietary reviews .

Why is it useful to publish reviews on a site?

Reviews play a central role in improving SEO , attracting organic traffic and monetizing through affiliations.

But how do you go about publishing effective reviews? When is it appropriate to publish them, and most importantly, what are the real benefits? These are just some of the questions you need to ask yourself before launching into the creation of review content, which to be truly useful must meet quality requirements, including those required by Google in terms of originality and relevance.

Publishing quality reviews means creating a stable pontoon between the reader’s demand for transparent and original information and your authority as a content creator . Each review, starting with the core components such as descriptions, direct evidence, original images, and experience-based comparisons, can become an important piece of content for attracting organic traffic and building a lasting reputation .

When done well, they can then bring multiple benefits to the site both in the immediate and long-term. For those seeking to improve visibility through search engines, optimized reviews having a balance of keywords, targeted content and authentic evidence allow them to stand out in the most competitive SERPs.

In addition, for those sites that rely on affiliations, reviews must know how to balance informational capacity and conversion drive . For example, readers much more appreciate reviews that seriously argue pros and cons rather than forcibly push toward purchase. Google itself tends to penalize those contents that are too promotional or point to a single seller, while it appreciates more reviews that offer variety and objectivity. Including more buying options by including links to multiple sellers is a good way to increase trust with both the audience and the algorithms .

While making quality reviews is essential to attracting traffic, subsequent monetization through affiliate links requires a careful and professional approach : it is not enough to simply insert random links to a product or service, because it is necessary to attach due importance to the value of the information provided, so as not to appear too conversion-oriented.

Moreover, well-crafted content also brings benefits in the long run: publishing reviews that grow over time and are updated allows you to generate constant traffic, building around your site an established reputation. Periodic updates improve the freshness of the content, keeping the audience loyal and meeting the criteria of search engines, which better index pages that are dynamic and always up to date.

Finally, a well-visible, search-engine-optimized review has more than just SEO value: it helps improve its referral identity for that specific category covered, while also attracting new affiliate partnerships with vendors interested in the quality traffic the site manages to generate. With the right balance between optimization and affiliation, reviews can produce long-term benefits, both in terms of perceived authority and as a steady stream of revenue from commissions generated by user purchases stimulated by the links in the reviews themselves.

How to write an effective review

But let’s try to go into more practical detail, starting with the approach needed to this topic.

Writing an effective review is not just an exercise in personal opinion-it is a well-structured process that requires a strategic approach, careful research, and a focus on direct experience. A well-crafted review must offer added value to those who read it and, at the same time, meet the needs of search engines, to gain visibility in SERPs and reach a wider audience.

The main challenge is to be able to create a coherent narrative, structured on several levels: from the description of the reviewed object to the formulation of subjective observations, all supported by tangible evidence such as technical data, original images or multimedia content.

From research to idea development: how to set up a good structure

Every review starts with a basic structure that should not be too rigid, but allows for the best organization of information. Research is the preliminary phase: if we are reviewing a product, it is essential to know thoroughly all the technical characteristics and to have a non-superficial idea of the available alternatives, or of previous versions if it is an evolution of the same model. If, on the other hand, we are tackling a review of services or experiences, as in the case of restaurants or travel experiences, it is important to contextualize our opinion within a broader scenario that also takes into account the opinions of others.

Once this preliminary information has been gathered, it is time to move on to structuring the review. Every effective review must have a clear introduction that succinctly and directly presents the subject of the review. The introduction serves not only to give a preview of what we are going to talk about, but also to immediately grab the reader’s attention.

Then follows the detailed description part . Here we need to tell the reader about essential features of the product or service, and not just report technical data (which we can easily find in the manufacturer’s data sheet). A good description includes specific references and shows how that product or service really works, based on direct evidence and personal arguments. This is where the review begins to take shape, turning into content that can effectively guide the reader.

Once this phase is over, we move on to the most personal part, which is the subjective evaluation. Here we should not limit our opinions to simple statements, but support the judgment with critical analysis: how did the product impress us? What are its strengths and weaknesses? These considerations, when presented with sound arguments (such as comparisons against other products or feedback based on user experience), help to create a smooth , well-constructed narrative that will prevent the text from ending up as a mere rewrite of the technical specifications provided by the manufacturer.

The importance of details and critical observations

A review cannot simply provide general information, but must go into specific details, which are the heart of the content. Every product, service, or experience has specifics that make it unique, and it is these nuances that make the difference between a useful review and an ineffective one.

For example, if we are reviewing an electronic product, such as a smartphone, it is critical to talk about features such as battery life, screen resolution, camera functions, or material quality. These elements help the reader understand what that device can actually offer and whether it really fulfills the manufacturer’s promises. Different is the case with a restaurant or hotel, where it is details about the atmosphere, quality of service or cleanliness that play a crucial role, in addition clearly to ratings of dishes and overall experience.

Being specific is not just about listing data. It is appropriate to make critical observations that are well screened: every quality review provides an honest assessment, highlighting both merits and flaws, because that is what the reader expects. People reading a review want honest guidance, not text that appears to be written only to promote the product. Transparency is vital, and one should never be afraid to point out any limitations or weaknesses of the reviewed item. The strength of a review also lies in its impartiality and ability to balance what works with what does not.

Critical details, combined with a clear exposition of the benefits, are what allows the reader to make an informed decision, which is why they should always be made explicit consistently without trying to “soften” any negative opinions, which could instead strengthen the credibility of the text.

Add concrete evidence: images, multimedia content, data

In today’s context, reviews cannot just be textual. Concrete evidence is what makes a review more tangible and persuasive, and many readers today expect to see images, videos, or data that prove what is described in words. This is especially relevant in the context of reviews of technology products or tangible goods, where sharp images of the product, unboxing videos, screenshots or movies showing the product in operation succeed in giving the reader visual proof of quality, size and performance.

This multimedia content adds value and also helps to increase the interaction rate: an introductory video, a comparative test or a recording of one’s user experience are all elements that capture the audience’s attention , especially when it is content shared through visual channels such as YouTube , Instagram or Pinterest.

But it is not just about visual elements. The demonstration of quantitative evidence (technical measurements such as benchmarks, battery life, connection speed, and so on), accompanied by a clear qualitative interpretation (for example, our personal impressions of how we found using the product), lends credibility to the entire content of the review.

For those writing reviews of services or experiences (such as a restaurant or tourist destination), multimedia elements can also include audio or immersive images, to allow the reader to immerse themselves in the feelings conveyed by the venue, view, or landscape. To deny importance to these aspects is to exclude from the review a part of reality that might be strategic for the reader. In addition, search engines increasingly reward content that offers complete user experiences , not only in the form of text but also through images and videos.

Writing reviews: common mistakes to avoid

Writing reviews may seem like a simple task, but it is fraught with pitfalls. A common mistake is falling into the promotional trap, turning the review into a direct sales text. Avoiding overly enthusiastic or overly positive tones is crucial if we want to keep our review credible. Readers are not looking for a corporate brochure; they want an honest opinion that contains realistic feedback about the experience of use or enjoyment.

Another common mistake is that of superficiality, especially in technical or functional descriptions. Summarizing technical specifications taken from the product sheet without adding personal value to the discussion is exactly what Google discourages. The algorithm looks for original and authentic content , which goes beyond simply repeating information that is already there. In practice, describing the product does not mean reporting the manufacturer’s data, but contextualizing it according to one’s own use and experience.

Equally serious is the absence of hard evidence. The mistake of writing a review from only third-party material or external sources-without ever having tested the product-is obvious to the reader and can seriously undermine the reputation of the site or author. Google favors, and so do readers, original reviews , full of authentic feedback and direct evidence.

Writing reviews without conviction or insight is not only ineffective, but can also have a negative effect: a reader disappointed by a sloppy review is unlikely to return to that site, and his or her judgment could affect the overall reputation of the platform.

SEO optimization for reviews: recommended actions

To get traffic, however, it is not enough to follow the rules for writing a good review if we do not also look after SEO optimization best practices, which put our content in the best chance of emerging on search engines. An SEO-friendly review, in fact, allows you to climb the SERPs, making yourself more findable for users and potentially outranking other reviews in gaining more visibility.

But we need to get out of old preconceptions and outdated optimization methods: in today’s SEO, writing a strategic review no longer means a mere exercise in keyword insertion or technical arrangement of elements such as tags and title. These actions, while not to be neglected entirely, are no longer sufficient in a landscape where search engines, supported by the growing presence ofAI-based models , are now able to understand contexts and intent with semantic precision never seen before.

Optimizing a review means shaping a content that perfectly meets the information needs of the user, anticipating his or her doubts, needs, and even possible related questions that might arise during the search path. This new approach is not limited to coldly recalling single keywords or mechanical phrases, but focuses on recognizing the user’s true purpose, creating useful contexts , and strategically using the new AI-driven technologies that are changing the very nature of Search.

Moving beyond the concept of keywords: let’s start with context and search intent

One of the most persistent mistakes in traditional SEO for reviews was to simply identify keywords relevant to a product or service and build on the terms a content that aimed primarily at direct ranking. But today, the keyword as an isolated entity no longer exists: tools and algorithms such as Google BERT or RankBrain and AI evolutions such as SearchGPT show us that what search engines are looking for is no longer a random keyword, but a total understanding of the context behind the search made by the user.

In this scenario, focusing articles and reviews on the single keyword no longer makes sense because it does not solve the complexity of modern queries. Every user who comes to Google has a query that carries multiple levels of intent: from practical questions about how a product works, to comparative evaluations between models, to deeper desires for confirmation or critical analysis. Writing an effective review today means intercepting these levels, building content that addresses the reader’s real needs with precision and depth.

SEOZoom helps us in this process by offering advanced tools such as the Question Explorer, which allows us to identify all the questions users ask online about a particular product or service. These questions are not just random queries, but represent the heart of the search intent and help us turn our content into a complete experience for those who read it.

Writing to answer questions: the importance of query research

Questions are no longer simply secondary elements on which to build FAQs or additional paragraphs: they have become the real focus of modern SERPs and, with the advent of AIs such as ChatGPT or the new Google Gemini, they are increasingly projecting themselves as the main unit of informational discourse on the Web.

Optimizing a review therefore means exploiting the logic of query search, designing content that is structurally capable of responding to the expressed queries and, even more so, to the implicit queries that accompany a search. Think, for example, of a user searching for “what is the best laptop for 2024?” Behind this query are at least three intents: to identify the best product, to understand the parameters of choice (power, battery life, price), and to compare multiple models. Writing a review that does not address each of these aspects means failing to fully meet the user’s need and, as a result, subtracting value from the content.

SEOZoom ‘s tools support us with the ability to map not only the main keywords, but also the entire semantic cluster and related question/query system. For example, through the aforementioned Question Explorer we can find out which keywords trigger the People Also Ask box shown in Google SERPs: emerging questions in these spaces provide us with valuable signals and can guide us in building comprehensive and perfectly optimized reviews.

How to structure a question-based review

A well-optimized review for modern SEO, then, must be written NOT with the “main keyword” in mind, but by imagining as many related and relevant questions as possible that users might ask. Examples of questions to map:

• What are the main benefits of this product?
• How does it perform compared to alternatives?
• What are the major limitations I should consider before purchasing?
• Is it suitable for a specific use (e.g., work, gaming, streaming)?

Each question serves as a driver for a comprehensive and detailed paragraph that helps us better cover the search intent and increase the chances of being chosen by artificial intelligence systems as the best source for meeting the information need.

An innovative approach is to treat each query as a secondary mini-query, organizing the review around these micro-intentions and thus being not only more readable but also much more compatible with AI grounding systems such as Google Gemini.

Building semantically rich content: thematic clusters and context

To stand out in SERPs and secure quality traffic, we can no longer write reviews based on single optimizations. Machine learning models now analyze an entire piece of content to extract semantic clusters, or the set of related topics on the page that help the search engine understand the overall context of the review.

This means we need to:

• Write in a semantically rich and varied manner, using synonyms and terminology related to the topic of the article.
• Keep the content “aligned” with the main topics, avoiding drifts that might take the page off topic.
• Provide solid answers to key search intent, delving into relevant subtopics with details and data.

SEOZoom helps us discover which topics and related keywords allow us to fully optimize the content and identify new words and phrases that belong to the semantic network of the topic, making our content more useful in the eyes of both users and AI.

Putting the user at the center: designing with reader-first mindset

Finally, well-optimized content never comes from a purely SEO-traditional approach. We cannot write with only ranking in mind, but we must aim to put the user at the center of the experience. Technicalities, SEO tricks or keyword density count for nothing without content that speaks directly to people and satisfies their need for knowledge.

Let us always ask ourselves: why should a user choose this review over others? This crucial question should guide every stylistic, technical and content choice we face when approaching the writing of content optimized for modern SEO.

Monitoring the performance of reviews

Once published, a review cannot be left to its own devices. Even if the content is well written and optimized, monitoring its performance is essential to understand whether the strategy employed is working or whether changes, updates, or improvements need to be made. Any content on the Web must be flexible and constantly evolving, and the same is true for reviews.

Monitoring reviews is no different from monitoring the performance of any other web page, as it is part of the broader issue ofcontinuous optimization. It is not enough to focus solely on the quality of the content at the time of publication. It is essential to keep an eye on key metrics such as:

• Traffic received, to check how many people actually visit the page and where they come from;
• Browsing Time, which indicates how long the reader stayed on the review, a sign of real interest in the content;
• CTR (Click-Through Rate), which shows the percentage of clicks compared to the number of search engine impressions.

These metrics form an overall picture of how the review is performing on the Web. If the traffic is low or the dwell time is very short, it could be a sign that the review needs changes or insights to be more interesting and engaging. Some relevant keywords may be missing or some sections may not be complete enough to meet users’ expectations.

Monitoring can also guide an ongoing optimization strategy : regularly updating the review with new details, updates with respect to product evolutions or newer comparisons with different models can keep interest high, both from users and from search engines. Updated pages with fresh content tend to maintain their value over time, improving SEO performance and visibility.

The importance of continuous experience and concrete evidence in reviews

Now more than ever, online reviews must be able to stand out not only for the quality of the content itself, but also for the direct and concreteexperience demonstrated by the writer. Users are increasingly demanding more transparency and authenticity in reviews, looking for indicators of credibility and authority. Search engines such as Google also favor this type of content: reviews that offer tangible evidence, based on real experiments, are rewarded in search results over generic and superficial content, also in view of what the EEAT parameters require .

The importance of experience manifests itself on two levels: on the one hand, it is crucial that the writer demonstrates that he or she has had hands-on contact with the product or service being reviewed, providing feedback based on hard data and personal observations. On the other, the review must be able to build trust with the audience, leveraging the author’s expertise and ability to communicate critically and professionally, without appearing to be influenced by promotional intent.

How direct experience makes a difference

A quality review is not limited to simply reinterpreting product sheets or compiling opinions gathered from other sources. The key to an effective review, whether of a product, service or experience, lies in the direct experience of the author. Readers and Google itself are very adept at perceiving the difference between a text that reports generic information and one that, in addition to talking about the product, gets to the heart of the experience, offering a unique and personal perspective.

Google, in particular, through the Google Reviews System, rewards reviews that demonstrate a hands-on experience. The algorithm is programmed to recognize authentic content, in which the author does not simply describe what is already known. Reviews based on verified experiences offer data and comparisons that provide a better understanding of the features, applications, and any gaps in the product in question.

But what does it mean in practice to provide a review based on direct experience? The reviewer must concretely show how he or she interacted with the product or service, offering answers to common doubts and comparing how the technical information translates into daily use. For example, in reviewing an electronic device, one might discuss actual battery performance , check the durability of materials, or demonstrate whether the claimed speed is tangible in actual use.

Comparative reviews offer an additional level of insight, allowing the author to relate a product to its competitors or earlier versions. This type of review adds extra value for the reader, who not only gains information about a specific product, but also how it compares to similar alternatives on the market. Each comparison amplifies the reader’s ability to contextualize the information received, providing a comparative view that is useful for making a decision. These comparisons enrich the content of the review and are highly valued by readers, especially in practical areas such as technology, automotive, or catering.

Direct experience, therefore, not only brings authenticity, but also makes the review much more interesting than content that is limited to superficial patterns of description. It also improves the authoritativeness of the page in the eyes of the public and, consequently, search engines.

Author’s voice and authoritativeness: building trust

Another key aspect of building credibility with reviews is the clear and transparent presence of the author. People choose to trust reviews written by figures they perceive as experts or passionate. It is no longer sufficient to publish a review without clear attribution or without indicating who is behind that review: the identity of the author plays a strategic role in ensuring authority and trustworthiness.

Explicitly presenting who the author of the review is, clearly exposing his or her specialization or experience in the field addressed, is a critical element in cementing trust in the reader. Pages that show the author along with a detailed biography allow the user to assess who the review is coming from and on what basis they can consider it credible. If the author is a technology expert, with years of experience in reviewing smartphones, this detail should be highlighted. If, on the other hand, the focus is on reviews of services such as dining or tourism, the reader will appreciate knowing the author’s track record in that field.

Also, an unbiased voice that appropriately balances both merits and demerits of the product or service reviewed appears much more honest and authentic. The advice is to avoid overly enthusiastic or, conversely, overly critical tones , especially if not supported by tangible facts. This balance allows for professional and honest communication , ensuring that the review is perceived as trustworthy by both new and returning readers.

Finally, Google considers the figure of the author as a determining factor in evaluation. In YMYL (Your Money or Your Life) fields, such as health, finance or education, search engines pay more attention to the authoritativeness of the source, rewarding content written by experts in the field. Thus, presenting a thorough biography of the author-where his or her credentials, past experience and contributions to the field are indicated-increases the authority of the individual review, but also of the site as a whole.

The experience and expertise of the person who signs the review then become elements of value not only for readers, but also for search engines, consolidating the trustworthiness (reliability) of the site and its content.

Google Reviews System: the algorithm for evaluating reviews

We have mentioned it in several places, and it is now time to delve into precisely what Google’s Reviews System is and what it implies for the review content we publish on our sites.

The Reviews System, in Italian reviews system, is one of the automatic ranking systems that Google uses in various areas: specifically, it focuses on a very particular type of queries and content because it serves to ensure that users interested in commercial or informational searches find among the results provided by the search engine only (or mostly) content with reviews that include personal, original and in-depth research, rather than bare texts that simply summarize others’ considerations. It is therefore an algorithm that seeks to evaluate and reward the best content focused precisely on reviews of various things, such as products, services, destinations, games, movies or other topics, and there are specific directions for adapting site and pages to this update and for writing quality product reviews according to Google.

As we read on the official Google Search Central page describing the features and operation of this algorithm, released on April 12, 2023, it is thus an algorithmic system that aims to better reward high-quality reviews, that is, content that provides in-depth analysis and original research and is written by experts or enthusiasts who know the topic well.

The reviews system is meant to ensure that people see reviews that share in-depth research, rather than thin content that simply summarizes a range of products, services, or other things. From a technical perspective, it is designed to evaluate articles, blog posts, pages, or similar stand-alone first-party content written for the purpose of providing a recommendation, opinion, or analysis, and does not evaluate third-party reviews, such as those posted by users in the reviews section of a product or service page.

To better determine the scope of the “review,” Google clarifies that they can be about any topic and focus on a single thing, direct comparison of similar items, or hierarchically ranked lists of recommendations, and “can be reviews of products like laptops or winter jackets, media content like movies or video games, or services and activities like restaurants or fashion brands.”

The history of the algorithm on reviews: it was originally Google Product Reviews system

In fact, as the more observant will recall, the Google Reviews System is not Google’s first intervention focused on content with reviews, and in fact this system is just an extension to more areas of the Google Product Reviews system, originally started in 2021 only for English searches in the United States (and with at least four major updates in the works, as recounted here) and then expanded to other languages (including Italian) in February 2023.

In its initial intentions, the Product Reviews system was an algorithm that sought to bring up in Google’s SERPs the best content focused on “product reviews” alone, that is, those that appear when we search Google for information about a product by typing its name with the term reviews added (e.g., iphone 14 reviews.

In the two years of its application in the U.S., this system has received a lot of attention from SEOs, so we find it useful to propose here the most interesting and useful considerations, which can be equally applied to the new version of the algorithm (which, in practice, only increases the types of content investigated and analyzed).

What are the goals of Google’s update on reviews

To be clear, the Reviews System is not one of the regular core algorithm updates or broad core updates that affects all search results, but an intervention that specifically targets reviews, reviews of products, services, or other various things.

Yet despite being separate from regular core updates, tips for producing quality content “are relevant here as well,” official documentation says.

As an overall goal, Google intends “to show users content that provides in-depth analysis and original research, and that is written by experts or enthusiasts who know the topic well.” In the search engine’s view, posting high-quality reviews can help people learn more about the things they are considering, such as products, services, destinations, games, movies or other topics, and in general, reviews can be a great resource to help people when making decisions.

For this reason, the system on reviews works to ensure that people see among Google’s search results primarily links to reviews that share in-depth research, rather than thin content that summarizes or simply a range of products or services or, worse yet, publishes fake reviews (perhaps with information inferred or directly copied from datasheets provided by manufacturers, of which they represent only rewritten versions of product specifications).

In practice, this means that Google aims to promote in search result rankings review content that is unique and stands out from that of competitor sites, going beyond most of the template-based information we see on the Web. The intervention is thus designed to “further help those who produce quality content in the area of reviews, ” going to demote (in intentions, at least) pages that instead adopt the discouraged practices.

With particular regard to products, which was as mentioned the first area of Google’s intervention, reviews with short product summaries are generally found on affiliate sites, more interested in making quick commissions than providing actual value to users, the documentation explained. In contrast, with the Reviews System Google is trying to bring out more and more reviews with “holistic product analysis, ” which include, for example, comparisons with similar products or previous versions, or provide when possible quantitative analysis and all the data that can help consumers make a purchase decision, and this applies to other content as well.

The intervention is meant to show the most useful and beneficial information possible for users: having verified that people “value product reviews that share in-depth research, rather than meager content that simply summarizes a series of products,” Google designed the update precisely to reward such content and make it stand out better in SERPs in all possible areas where users might be interested in reading articles, blog posts, and pages that provide a personal and well-reasoned recommendation, opinion, or analysis.

How the review system works

From a technical point of view , the Reviews System primarily evaluates review content at the page level: however, Google’s documentation explains, it could evaluate the entire site and any content if it publishes a significant amount of content with reviews (in double-digit percentages of total content). Conversely, if we don’t have many reviews (i.e., if the bulk of the site consists of other content), it is unlikely that a site-wide rating will be performed.

In the case of products, the specific structured data might help Google better identify whether a piece of content is a product review, but the algorithms do not rely on that alone.

In addition, some international analysts-and in particular Lily Ray ‘s excellent insight-have pointed out that in the United States, the Product Reviews System has helped Google reclassify the search intent behind many business and transactional queries, leading to a better understanding of people’s real intentions, to which the SERP now returns in response in the top positions a product review rather than e-Commerce product pages or other types of content (or vice versa, if the user is really ready for action instead), and this could then be the case for the other application areas as well.

Who cares about the Reviews System

While not a broad core update, then, this algorithmic update could still cause some shakeup in SERPs, although technically it should only affect pages that publish content with reviews and not other types of content, as explained.

Obviously, sites that do not publish reviews have nothing to worry about, but conversely, sites that publish reviews of products, services, destinations, games, movies, or other topics (and for which such content accounts for more than 10 percent of total pages) may be affected and should monitor their traffic closely for any out-of-ordinary fluctuations in traffic or rankings. Moreover, as mentioned above, the reviews evaluated by the algorithmic system are those written directly by the site authors, and thus not third-party reviews, such as those posted by users in the comments and feedback section of a product or service page.

Specifically, its effects impact both ranking in the classic SERPs and performance in Google Discover: from what we can guess, Google’s algorithms do not directly punish reviews deemed to be of inferior quality (those that provide sparse content that merely summarizes generic or copied information), but pages that provide such content may notice drops in ranking due to overtaking by other sites, which instead publish more in-depth content and will therefore get a boost in visibility.

In short: although the effect is similar to that of a penalty, technically it is just a different way of evaluation by Google, which brings out with higher rankings the sites with better content, and therefore the remedial work must focus on the quality gap to try to close.

More specifically, the official guide explains that in order to recover from a drop in rankings and traffic caused by the Reviews System, a site must make the appropriate corrections to the affected content, of course, and usually wait for the release of a subsequent specific update. In any case, it is worth remembering that Google’s automatic evaluation of content with reviews is only one of “many factors used to rank content, so changes can occur at any time for various reasons.”

How to write quality reviews for Google

Let us now go into the tips and best practices for writing reviews that are good and of quality, starting again with the theory behind this intervention to get (finally!) to the most practical directions for publishing good, effective and useful content for readers’ needs.

As mentioned, for Google, a review is of quality if it provides detailed information written “by experts or enthusiasts who know the subject well” and intend to provide a recommendation, opinion or analysis on the topic, and not if it simply represents a repetition of information already provided by the producer or otherwise data and resources already found elsewhere on the Web.

The search engine’s documentation then presents a specific list of additional useful pointers “to consider in terms of reviews for those who create content,” which are then used to verify whether the content we post on the site meets the characteristics and requirements that Google prioritizes.

First, Google identifies three specific types of “author” who can create a review page:

• Experienced staff member or merchant/entrepreneur who guides people between competing products.
• Blogger who provides independent opinions about products.
• Editorial board member at a news or other site.

How to write high-quality reviews

Regarding writing tips, Google reminds that the general rules of SEO copywriting and, in particular, the latest guidance defining the usefulness of content always apply .

Specifically, reviews should be written to help people make decisions and to offer them added value: therefore, the basic advice is to focus on the quality and originality of the reviews, not the length, following as many of these writing best practices as possible, which can allow our pages to stand out in Google Search and on other Google platforms:

• Evaluate the product or service from the user’s point of view.
• Demonstrate that you are knowledgeable about the subject of the review and have specific, specialized expertise on the subject. In other words, demonstrate that you are an expert.
• Provide evidence in the form of pictures, audio or other links that refer to our direct experience with the subject of the review to support our expertise and emphasize the authenticity of the review.
• Share quantitative measurements regarding the performance of a product or service according to various categories.
• Explain how and in what ways the product or service differs from the competition.
• Describe similar and comparable products or services for consideration or explain which products and services might be better for certain uses or circumstances.
• Present and analyze the advantages and disadvantages of a particular product or service based on our personal research.
• Describe how a product has evolved from previous versions or models to make improvements, solve problems, or otherwise help users make a purchasing decision.
• Identify key decision factors for the category and performance of the product or service in key areas (e.g., a car review might consider fuel economy, safety, and handling as key decision factors and, therefore, might evaluate performance in those areas).
• Describe key choices about how a product was designed and its effect on users beyond the manufacturer’s explanations.
• Include links to other useful resources (from our own site or other sites) to help the reader make a decision.
• Consider including links to multiple vendors to offer the reader the opportunity to make purchases from the merchant of his or her choice.
• Specify why we believe a product or service is the best by providing direct, first-hand evidence to support it when we label and recommend something as the best overall or for a particular purpose.
• Verify that lists with rankings contain enough useful content to stand on their own, even if we choose to write separate, detailed individual reviews for each recommended product or service.

The value of reviews

Google’s guide also emphasizes the value of reviews , which as mentioned can be “an excellent resource for shoppers when making a decision,” and for example can make a difference when they are considering which product to buy, because they can guide shoppers between competing products, helping them choose the best brand or model for their needs and budget, especially if they also show what the product physically looks like or how it is used, with unique content in addition to that provided by the manufacturer.

Therefore, the site that publishes content with reviews-whether it is an e-Commerce or a site that specializes in just this type of item-must provide pages that can actually help people learn more about a product or service they are interested in.

And so, more specifically for the area of products, Google urges us to write reviews focusing on quality and originality and not, as mentioned, on a mythical aspect such as word count that has no basis in concreteness, nor on “pattern-based information that you see everywhere on the Web,” so as to offer maximum value to readers.

In addition, the documentation specifies that reviews often use affiliate links “so that if someone finds a review useful and follows the link provided to purchase, the author is rewarded by the vendor”: this mode is legitimate (if done respecting Google’s stance on affiliate programs) and is a possible opportunity for profit and monetization for sites (which, however, must be aware of Google’s attention to this process).

Google Product Reviews, the analysis of attention to product reviews.

Going back in time and focusing on the original “Product Reviews System,” the talk further demonstrated Google’s interest in the e-Commerce features of its search engine, both by studying solutions to enrich the experience of users interested in searching for information about products to eventually consider purchasing them, and with tools designed for sites engaged in sales. Examples include, among others, the Google Shopping storefront made free of charge, the inclusion of popular products in SERPs or guidance on how to improve product information.

Also, in the aforementioned article, Ray identifies a number of potential (and very plausible) reasons why Google launched the product review rating system and devoted so much care to it over time (with at least five major updates in less than 24 months):

1. Response to user feedback and bad press

Google itself admits that extensive user testing has shown that “people value product reviews that share in-depth research, rather than thin content that simply summarizes a range of products.” This leads us to speculate that the search engine received such feedback frequently, also associated with articles of various types and sources that negatively criticized the way Search’s algorithms ranked the content of product reviews.

The expert recalls how the now famous post “Google Search is Dying” by Dmitri Brereton and the similar analyses in the New Yorker “What Google Search Isn’t Showing You” turned the spotlight on a number of quality problems present in Search – and in particular Kyle Chayka recounts his own negative experience in looking for recommendations for a new toaster oven, which provided in response “aggregate listings clearly designed to manipulate Google’s search algorithm and profit from affiliate marketing.”

Low-quality, poorly written product reviews are rampant, and it is not a good thing for Google to have its algorithms perceived and narrated as shoddy in various media: it is what also prompted the release of Helpful Content System, the broader and more general algorithm that rewards useful content, which is an attempt to curb the presence of pages with content written for the primary purpose of gaining traffic and positions.

2. Increase in affiliate sites of various types

Another possible explanation for Google’s focus on bringing out high-quality product reviews could lie in the significant increase in the number of affiliate sites and blogs that Google is scanning and indexing, which has also led to an increase in low-quality affiliate content. According to the Internet Advertising Bureau, 53 percent of affiliates increased their spending in the channel between 2020 and 2021:

Journalist Nicole Scott, former editor-in-chief of Mobile Geeks, had noticed a decline in the quality of product reviews over time, writing that “it has become a common practice for product review writers to read reviews on Amazon and simply reuse this content as Reviews of our readers or Products our readers like, without actually trying the products themselves,” as can easily be seen from the fact that these articles “lack detailed information about how the products actually work, which could only be obtained by using the item extensively.”

To counter this pejorative drift, Google has specified in best practices some precise guidelines for handling affiliations (e.g., multiple references to actual trials and direct experiences with products).

3. The growing threat from Amazon

In the background then is always the challenge with Amazon, Google’s increasingly direct competitor, which has responded with a number of significant changes to its search results, particularly in relation to Google Shopping. Many of these changes have sought to make Google a more attractive place for both merchants who want to sell products and shoppers who want to begin their online product searches.

For this reason, it seems fair to assume that improving the quality of product review content, which often ranks in the top positions for product keywords, is one of Google’s main goals: if users rely on Search to display the best product summaries and reviews as part of their path to purchase, Google has an obligation to ensure that the content is of the highest possible quality to best meet users’ needs.

4. Application in SERPs

Finally, Google may have focused on accurate and high-quality product review content because it collects and uses such information by displaying it directly in its SERPs. In particular, examples have been recounted in the past of experimentation with a feature called in English Buying Guides that is triggered for mobile searches and pops up information boxes with in-depth links about the product that was of interest during the queries. These Buying Guides incorporate many of the important questions answered by product review sites into the search results, using accordions to expand on different product considerations.

Google’s clarifications on the Product Reviews rating system.

Various Googlers have also intervened on the topic over time via social, and Barry Schwartz on Seroundtable had collected the main responses as early as December 2021 that can help us better understand the intentions and goals of the Product Reviews system, later made active in Italy as well and finally merged into the new and broader Reviews system.

In particular, Developer Advocate Alan Kent (who specializes in the e-Commerce sector, so to speak) clarifies that the update is relevant mainly “for sites that publish articles that review products,” giving the example of a site like “bestTVsunder$200.com” (something like “bestTVsunder$200dollars.com”), and seeks to “improve the quality and usefulness of the reviews shown to users.”

In more detail, Kent quickly dwells on the two innovative aspects for content creators: first, the invitation to include outbound links to multiple retailers is motivated by the fact that people are “wary of reviews where everyone points to a vendor’s affiliate links, ‘ because it raises the question of ’whether it’s really a good review, or whether it’s trying to maximize what the vendor wants to push,” which conversely the inclusion of links to other retailers can reduce or eliminate.

The use of “evidence” to show that the product has actually been tested, on the other hand, serves to address another doubt that may strike readers, namely that the author is just reworking third-party information. Google thus wants to make pages written by someone “who has made a real effort to review a product and is offering real value to the community” rank better, and advice about “things to include in the review is meant to make clear the effort they personally put into it.”

This content is much more useful than content offered by a site that “takes product descriptions from vendors, makes minor edits, and then posts it as a review,” because it is made by “someone who actually reviews the product and gives their own unique perspective on it.”

John Mueller also reiterated that Google “does not recommend simply reusing the content and calling it a review, because it’s not a review if the author is just rewording the specifications and not reviewing the product.” In his experience, there are “tons of very low quality copy-paste reviews,” but in addition to the blatantly bad ones, “there’s also a ton of content where you take product pages and reformulate them or rewrite them as something new” and that ranks well because “now there’s no metric for it and it’s seen as great content.”

In short, the Googlers imply that, especially in the long run, the search engine will be able to recognize and reward only those who are truly dedicated to creating content that is unique and capable of standing out from those from their product review competitors, adding details and evidence to certify this effort to readers.

Beyond Google’s words: the factors that determine the quality of a product review

Remaining in the realm of analysis and speculation done by international SEO experts (who, as mentioned, have had the opportunity to test the concrete applications of the Reviews System in the United States during these two or so years in which it has been dedicated only to products), we can go beyond the information publicly shared by Google to provide more concrete and more useful indications for practical application, valid even today with the extension of the system’s fields of evaluation.

In particular, Jennifer Slegg ‘s excellent work is based on the effects of Google’s (first) algorithmic intervention (April 2021) and provides a comprehensive overview of which pages had actually lost traffic and for what reasons – and, thus, identifies which types of content Google was rewarding.

The starting point, also reiterated in this article, is that Google wants to ensure that its search results are always of the highest quality: in this sense, “a product review with that is simply a regurgitation of an Amazon description” is something that Google has an interest in ranking lower, because it is of lower or minimal quality.

In fact, the search engine is trying to limit the appearance in SERPs (at least in the top positions) of reviews that are “just rewritten versions of what is on the manufacturer’s site,” and it is in this sense that the invitation to write with more originality and detail-which is also something that meets the interest of the reader who is looking for reviews to inform himself.

Thus, pages with reviews that do not add any value to distinguish themselves from any other reviews that can be found on the web are at risk of losing rankings: many of the product reviews devalued by Google already in the past months were limited to reporting information about the basic functionality of the product, including “probably a fair number of keywords,” but were devoid of “the parts that users actually search for when searching Google for product reviews, particularly those for more expensive items.”

This means that the algorithm does not “specifically target all affiliate sites,” but “ affiliate sites that are not doing anything to improve the user experience with their reviews” and, at the same time, also “sites that offer low-quality product reviews that earn money through Google AdSense or other ad networks and not through affiliate links.”

The competency aspect and the role of the author

Then there are two words that jump out at you when reading Google’s best practices (mentioned explicitly or indirectly), namely expertise and experience, which immediately refer back to the concept of E-E-A-T for Google: if already in general being able to show and demonstrate expertise and experience of an author is (increasingly) crucial, because it is something that readers, but also the algorithms themselves, look out for, this is even more true for affiliate content or product reviews, which end up under Google’s direct lens.

According to Slegg’s analysis, in order to succeed in the rankings, a lot of work needs to be done on E-E-A-T, highlighting the expertise of the authors of the reviews and why users should trust them, “including as much original information and data in such reviews to bring them to a higher level of quality, whether it be videos, images, additional research, benchmarks, statistics and real product feedback.”

According to the expert, on the practical side, we need to carefully examine the product reviews posted and the authorship associated with each of them, checking whether we show the name of the author who reviewed the product or whether all content is posted under “Admin,” and trying to figure out whether it is easy for a user to understand why he or she should trust what the review author is talking about. In his experience, many affiliate sites still make it difficult for users to find out anything about the author, although often this is because it is “cheap or respun” (of little value or recycled) content, whereas instead Google wants, all the more so with this update, to see and bring out some sort of expert knowledge involved in these reviews.

Therefore, it is important to show the expertise of the site’s authors, for example, by including a short bio of the author at the bottom of each product review and also creating a specific bio page, which offers more information about his or her expertise and why someone should trust what he or she has to say, with links to recent articles, indication of any awards or accolades won, and links to other sites to which he or she has contributed, which can show that other publishing entities have vouched for this figure as well.

After all, anyone can take a manufacturer’s description, add some fluff, and then include an Amazon affiliate link, but not everyone can write a solid review based on extensive experience in a given category.

Descriptions are not enough, you need evidence

Another relevant aspect is that “Google wants to try to differentiate product reviews where the author has a physical product in hand” from articles that are simply based on a cursory description of the product, made by sourcing information from other sites or from the manufacturer itself. Google’s goal is to bring out these “sincerely honest product reviews” with better rankings than “more spammy and more generic reviews,” because “a page masquerading as a product review where you haven’t really reviewed the product doesn’t provide a good user experience.”

In fact, much of what is listed in Google’s best practices for product reviews goes precisely in this direction, that is, it pushes authors to really try the product/service to be able to describe it in all its facets, answering questions that only real use can reveal.

In addition to evidence, elements such as videos and specially created multimedia content can also help to distinguish oneself from competitors, and thus characterize one’s review as “quality.”

Stand out from other reviews on the Web

More specifically on the topic of differentiating oneself from competitors, Jennifer Slegg identifies a number of possible actions to take when creating the review.

As mentioned, videos created while reviewing a product (that clearly show that there is a physical product actually tested), as well as action shots (that show the product in use) and photos of the product that are self-made (and not stock or taken from other sites) are an effective way to stand out and can offer a huge advantage to one’s page, because they immediately indicate to Google and readers that those reviews are legitimate versus more spammy reviews.

In addition, the review should also be reviewed and reworked after a period of time, because it is helpful to provide “an update on the use of the product after a month or after a few months of use, as sometimes annoyances with products are only really apparent after using them for a given time.”

Another tip to follow when creating a review is to avoid hype and sensationalism, which could make the content appear “skewed, show blatant favoritism and make some users suspicious, giving the feeling that the author is just trying to get a sales or affiliate commission and not offering the user an honest opinion.” Even if they are products that fully convince us or are top of the line, it is rare “for a product to be perfect to the last, and a review of a product without a single negative thing to say can seem unreliable”: therefore, it is advisable to include at least one or two negative aspects of a product, even if they are relatively minor in the “grand scheme of things.”

Obviously, to find these flaws or shortcomings it is not enough to rely only on the marketing material disseminated by the manufacturer-which is “very well designed to convince people that they cannot live without that product”-and indeed it is precisely the hype generated by PR that prompts users to look for less biased reviews. Basically, in fact, all reviews should be unbiased and objective, avoiding excesses in either direction: even saying “this product sucks” without offering details or explanations is wrong, while expressing a negative opinion supported by facts may be more helpful to the user.

The practical and technical aspects of writing quality reviews

Slegg’s analysis also dwells on some technical and practical aspects that can be useful to put into practice to make a review “quality.”

It starts with a general consideration: a review website can host articles dedicated to a single product-and thus very detailed reviews on this product, examined from all points of view also suggested by Google-but also summary articles, which can help consumers decide between several similar products, whether they are similar models from the same manufacturer or alternative models made by competing manufacturers. Nor are articles in the form of lists (such as “the best 10” and so on) to be overlooked, which indeed are invaluable for people looking for information.

A simple technical intervention that can be beneficial is to add the date to the review, which will help users understand whether the content presents current or old information-not to mention that Google shows the date for results in SERPs. As a consequence, we need to periodically update content – even content about products that are now out of production, which can still be searched by users and generate traffic, links and advertising revenue – to prevent it from being outdated compared to the information provided by competitors.

Also on the technical front, it is important that pages with product reviews are mobile friendly: some elements are “mobile-unfriendly,” says the author, who specifically mentions additional content such as graphics, images or PDFs that are not well adapted to mobile fruition or excessively long texts “without users being able to go directly to the part of the review most relevant to them.”

The last aspect pointed out by this comprehensive guide concerns the usefulness of providing moderated comments to content: “an active community, such as people commenting on a page, can really show how popular that site is.” Of course, this exposes you to risks because, like any user-generated content, you need to moderate comments and not just approve only the positive comments, but also show the negative ones “as long as they are written in a thoughtful and constructive manner.” Just as users find product reviews unreliable if they are too glaring, the same goes for comments if those on the page are only (and very) positive: this does not mean producing false negative comments, but not automatically refusing to approve contrary feedback “simply because they are not enthusiastic about the beauty of the product and potentially risk costing affiliate commissions.”

Write the perfect review

Create useful and effective content for readers and search engines

Find out more

Comments, moreover, can allow the page to earn featured snippets and provide additional ranking opportunities : a person commenting on a useful application of a product that might be omitted in the actual review “can make the page rank for that application and bring other users to the review looking for that specific information.”

SEOs’ analysis of the Product Reviews Update

International SEO analysts have also highlighted other central points on the issue, with Glenn Gabe in particular recounting that he has “ heavily analyzed the update since it was launched (April 2021, again, ed.), including the impact on different niche categories, content affected, site-level results, user experience factors on affected sites, and more,” and noted that, in fact, it seems to take a look at and perform a site- and section-level evaluation, not just individual pages. Sites with UGC reviews were also affected by the update, particularly those for which UGC reviews made up a large part of the main content on each page.

From the first release, especially, the focus on the experience and expertise required of the author writing and publishing a review began to become clear, and Google rewarded sites “that had reviews written by experts or enthusiasts and provided solid information about the author on the page or site (via a biography)” and that displayed “a logo and branding at the top of the page,” which immediately let the reader know who is providing the information.

How to demonstrate direct experience in the review

On the subject of the direct experience factor, the documentation updated as of April 2023 (modeled largely on the previous documentation focused only on product reviews) makes it very clear that the standard for demonstrating experience is much higher than simply including words or phrases such as “in my experience” or “my practical analysis” in the text.

In fact, there are specific ways in which authors can (and indeed must) demonstrate their experience and, in particular, make it clear to Google and readers that they have personally tested the product or service the review is about, which then takes on a higher value, and in particular best practices cite visual evidence, links to other experiences, and quantitative measurements as useful means of clearing up any doubt that the product has been personally handled, tested, used, and measured.

Bottom line: how to write a quality review

We have tried to clarify what is the way to create a quality review according to Google and according to expert analysis, which comes in particularly handy now that the Reviews system has debuted also for the Italian SERPs to apply the guidance to our pages – and indeed, some of the most popular sites with reviews follow these best practices and manage to stand out against competitors.

To recap, a first basic aspect to start from is to consolidate and highlight the E-E-A-T factors of content creators to give way to algorithms, but more importantly to people, to understand that articles are written by experienced and competent people, who can be trusted.

On the level of writing – indeed, page organization – it is useful to include in a review as much original information and data, because this way we bring it to a higher level of quality and differentiate it from the pages created by the (many) competitors: therefore, green light to the production of videos and images showing the product in action, but also to the use of additional research, benchmarking analysis, statistics and real feedback on products and services.

Obviously, the segment in which we operate can make a difference: some market areas require a much higher level of quality to position pages with product reviews well, but in general these tips can help raise the bar on the information experience offered to readers.