jeremy_stoppelman

Yes. This was recently examined in an HBS study. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2293164 (See section 3.4) ... You can also run a test yourself on Google to see if advertisers are given preferential treatment. For example: https://www.google.com/#q=site%3Ayelp.com%2Fbiz+%22yelp+sponsor%22+AND+%22this+place+sucks%22 (Why are these advertisers not "deleting" the negative reviews if this is a feature they've supposedly paid for?)

Here is one: http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-20126167-93/judge-dismisses-yelp-class-action-suit-for-good/

What part of that is bullshit?

“Rogue salespeople” acting in their own interests against Yelp’s training and policies could, in theory, promise a potential client anything -- but they have no way of fulfilling that promise. We haven’t built a product that allows businesses to remove negative reviews and a "duped" advertiser would obviously realize that right away and let us know. We have 57,000 paying advertisers who know what they get and that's not it.

Actually there is not "massive evidence" and in fact lawsuits about this have been repeatedly dismissed for lack of evidence. http://officialblog.yelp.com/2011/10/case-dismissed-again.html