Whatever one thinks of GMO's, and I have mixed feelings, it's apparent that there is a concerted campaign, most likely an organized one by GMO companies, their public relations firms and/or right wing groups against the movie Consumed. On the face of it, 312 ratings of "1," about 25% of votes, doesn't make sense in any other way, given a relatively large gap in votes between 1 and 5, and about 40% of the votes being in the 5 to 8 range. I think all the "1" votes should be eliminated. I don't see a way to contact IMDB directly to review this, so I'm posting here.
Posted 3 years ago
Michelle, Official Rep
Adrian, Champion
I didn't speak to that, and carefully avoided giving credence to those votes, instead speaking to what's going on in between. I wouldn't be surprised if some or many of the 10's may be concerted, perhaps to counter what's going on at the other end, and IMDB's algorithm is built to deal with that. At the same time, I assume some of the 10's are from genuinely liking the movie and its content. It's apparently a well made drama. So why not the same attitude toward the '1's? Because giving a '1' to a decently made movie, even if the reviewer really doesn't like the substance, is not a common practice except among hot heads and ideologues. There's a well-known bias in these type of scalings to grade higher than lower (think teacher or class ratings). To get so many '1' votes takes a concerted effort, whoever is behind it.
(Edited)
Adrian, Champion
See, this is where we will disagree. A 1 vote for a documentary made on a scientific topic that completely avoids science is completely appropriate. A 10 vote for the same movie is also completely inappropriate. Documentaries are judged more on substance than whether they are slick looking and well produced.
You could also make the case that the 1 votes are to counter the fake 10 votes. It's clear you don't like the rating of the movie but that doesn't mean any of the votes are an attempt at "ballot stuffing".
You could also make the case that the 1 votes are to counter the fake 10 votes. It's clear you don't like the rating of the movie but that doesn't mean any of the votes are an attempt at "ballot stuffing".
(Edited)
Except it's not a documentary! Doesn't say much for your scientific approach - or your understanding of surveys..
(Edited)
Adrian, Champion
Fair point but if you are going to make any movie based on junk science, you are going to have people rate it based on that content. I'm not sure why you think people of a scientific bent wouldn't rate it based on the science it contains.
People rate movies for different reasons. I'll lower my ratings for things if they have absurd science involved (and aren't full out sci-fi movies). The ratings pretty much even out. Even the best movies in the world have large votes of 1 (like Casablanca and Citizen Kane.)
People rate movies for different reasons. I'll lower my ratings for things if they have absurd science involved (and aren't full out sci-fi movies). The ratings pretty much even out. Even the best movies in the world have large votes of 1 (like Casablanca and Citizen Kane.)
Casablanca has 1.7% '1' votes and Citizen Kane has 2.3%, adjusted. Their 1-5 adjusted totals are 5.4% and 8.5%, respectively. Perhaps you should stick to non statistical subjects.
Adrian, Champion
Really, ad hominem attacks. That makes your point so much stronger. My point was never that they were identical statistically but that it shows how subjective movie ratings are. Is there any reasonable metric that one could look at and say Casablanca or Citizen Kane are among the worst movies ever made.
I'm shocked that you cannot believe that 20% of people that saw this movie would think it was awful. This is pretty common for anything that is in the least subjectively controversial. Explain to me again why the 1 votes are ballot stuffing but the 10 votes aren't? The statistical analysis that IMDb does a good job of filtering this stuff out. A 5 for this type of movie is pretty much where one would expect it to be.
I'm shocked that you cannot believe that 20% of people that saw this movie would think it was awful. This is pretty common for anything that is in the least subjectively controversial. Explain to me again why the 1 votes are ballot stuffing but the 10 votes aren't? The statistical analysis that IMDb does a good job of filtering this stuff out. A 5 for this type of movie is pretty much where one would expect it to be.
Col Needham, Official Rep
