online platforms does not have the same role as is the case on the offline market. A particularly important novelty, because of the development of collaborative economy, is the fact that the role of the provider of tourism services is taken on by a natural person who does not offer the services in the capacity of a trader, but in the capacity of a private person.27 In such circumstances, the model of fulfilling the transparency requirements and information duties of platform operators is extremely important. The protection of consumers, as recipients of tourism services offered by online platforms, can be efficient only if consumers are really in a position to make free and informed decisions on the selection of tourism services based on accurate, consistent, clear and comprehensible information and on a transparent ranking of services based on genuine, fair and sincere reviews. Platforms are expected to provide, in a transparent manner, a lot of information not only on the offered service but also on many other facts of importance for proper understanding of the data received from other users and posted on a platform. Behavioural studies dealing with the problem of transparency of online platforms, advertising and marketing practices in travel booking websites and online consumer reviews in the hotel sector show that, in practice, there is a whole range of problems connected with the transparency of information offered to consumers via platforms. These studies also show that the consumers using platforms, because of insufficient information, are unaware and unconcerned of the risks of unfair practices and misleading information.28 The awareness of consumers of platform practices related to search results is generally low.29 They are often unaware of identity of the party with whom they are entering into a contract. In particular, they are not even aware of whether the other contractual party is a trader or a natural person (a consumer) and how this is reflected on their rights, i.e. that they may not enjoy any consumer protection.30 Frequently, consumers believe that the contract is entered into with the platform operator in the capacity of a seller or a service provider.31 Non-transparent information may lead to the lack of confidence of consumers in the ranking and reviews of the offered tourism services. 32 This may have a negative impact on the functioning of the online tourism services market. Such undesirable effects for consumers, as well as for service providers, may be caused by numerous deficiencies when it comes to the provision of information, such as misleading and/or fake reviews, no time limits on reviews, lack of information of the scoring or rating systems, lack of information on platform practices related to search results, lack of verification of reviews and reviewers and the lack of transparency on commercial relationships between reviewers and platforms.33 Many of the problems connected with the transparency of the tourism markets have already been confirmed in practice on EU-wide screening websites (‘sweeps’34) of 2021 coordinated by the European Commission. A motive for the annual sweep were the results of the Market Monitor Survey of 2020 showing that as many as 71% of consumers consider reviews as very important when choosing their holiday accommodation. The fact that decisions are made on the basis of reviews requires special acting by platform operators when processing and posting consumer reviews. Insufficiently transparent reviews may lead to misleading practice when booking online tourism services. Within the screening process, 223 major websites from 26 EU Member States, Island and Norway were checked. The results show that at least 55% of the checked websites have potentially violated the EU rules on unfair commercal practice requiring that truthful information is presented to consumers to allow for their informed choices. For the remaining 18% of websites, the authorities also expressed serious doubts. Major irregularities were detected where platforms, by presenting the obtained reviews, had failed to carry out preliminary procedures to make sure that important source of pre-contractual information and an alternative or complement to complex terms and conditions. See Busch (2016), p. 226; Narciso, M. (2022a), pp. 350, 353-356; Sánches, E,B., Deegan, J., Pérez Ricardo, E.C. (2022) p.134. 27 See: Study, 2020, pp. 20, 21. 28 See: European Commission: Behavioural study on the transparency of online platforms, Final Report, 2018, p.5 (hereinafter: Study/Final report/2018). See Busch (2016), p. 228. 29 Ibid, p. 19. 30 Ibid, p. 28. 31 Ibid, p. 52. 32 On the reasons for the lack of reliability of ratings and reviews, see Narciso, M. (2022a), pp. 351-353. 33 See: Study, 2014, pp. 125, 126, 127; Study/Final Report/2018, pp. 45-59; Study, 2020, pp. 44-52. 34 Investigations (‘sweeps’) are carried out on the basis of Art. 29 Regulation (EU) 2017/2394 on cooperation between national authorities responsible for the enforcement of consumer protection laws. ‘Sweeps’ means concerted investigations of consumer markets through simultaneous coordinated control actions to check compliance with, or to detect infringements of, Union laws that protect consumers’ interests (Art. 3 point 16, Regulation 2017/2394).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==