At UPRIVA, we believe consumer reviews are only valuable when they reflect a genuine experience and an honest opinion.

UPRIVA owns and manages a network of consumer communities. This policy applies to reviews and accompanying photographs and videos submitted to our community websites, whether through an organised campaign or independently.

We collect reviews of products, services, locations and experiences. Throughout this policy, “reviews” refers to feedback about any of these.

We work with brands to collect consumer reviews through product trials, sampling and other review programs. In some campaigns, participants receive a product, voucher or other incentive to enable them to take part.

An incentive is never provided in exchange for a positive review.

Participants are free to share a positive, negative or mixed experience. The incentive does not depend on the rating or sentiment of their review.

What makes a review authentic?

An authentic review must:

• come from a genuine participant or reviewer;
• be based on their actual experience;
• reflect their honest opinion;
• be their own account, expressed in their own words;
• contain accurate information about their experience; and
• meet applicable participation and content requirements.

We do not accept fabricated experiences, copied reviews, deliberately misleading content or reviews presented as another person’s opinion.

Participants must disclose any employment, family, commercial or other connection to the brand or business that could affect how readers interpret their review. We may exclude a submission where that connection is incompatible with the review program, or require a clear disclosure where publication is appropriate.

Original photographs and videos

Photographs and videos must genuinely represent the participant’s experience with the product, service, location or experience being reviewed.

They must be created by the participant or taken on their behalf, for example by a friend or family member helping them capture their experience. Participants must have permission to submit the content and for it to be used as set out in the relevant participation terms.

Permission to use an image does not, by itself, make it an authentic record of the participant’s experience.

We do not accept photographs or videos copied or sourced from manufacturer or retailer websites, other people’s social media accounts, stock image libraries, other consumers or other unrelated sources as evidence of a participant’s own experience.

Content must not be generated, altered or staged in a way that misrepresents the experience or results. Basic cropping, lighting adjustments or similar edits are acceptable where they do not change what the content demonstrates.

We may use image verification and other technology to identify duplicated, copied, AI-generated or otherwise misleading or unauthorised content.

AI-generated content

Reviews must remain the participant’s own account of their genuine experience.

We do not accept reviews written by AI on a participant’s behalf, or AI-generated photographs, videos or other content presented as evidence of a real experience.

Spelling, grammar, translation and accessibility tools may be used to help participants communicate their own account, provided they do not invent experiences, add claims or change the participant’s meaning or opinion. Participants remain responsible for checking that their submission is accurate.

We may use AI detection and other technology as part of our screening process. An automated detection result is not treated as conclusive on its own. Where content is flagged, we consider relevant information and may use human assessment before making a final decision about its authenticity.

How we protect review integrity

We use a combination of technology, review signals and human moderation to identify potentially fraudulent or misleading submissions.

Depending on the campaign and the information available, checks may include:

• account and participation history;
• submission patterns and timing;
• duplicate or substantially similar reviews;
• unusual activity;
• IP or device information;
• image duplication or image-source information;
• AI-generated content indicators; and
• purchase, participation or other evidence relevant to the submission.

These checks help us identify content that may require further investigation. A flagged submission does not automatically mean a participant has acted dishonestly.

Information used for these checks is handled in accordance with the UPRIVA Terms & Conditions.

We don’t remove reviews because they’re negative

A genuine negative review is just as valuable as a positive one.

We do not reject or remove a review simply because a consumer gives a low rating or has something negative to say. A brand’s preference for positive feedback is not grounds for rejecting, changing or removing a review.

Our moderation decisions are based on authenticity, relevance, applicable content standards and legal requirements.

Campaign requirements may cover matters such as participant eligibility, completing the relevant trial and supplying relevant content. They never require participants to express a favourable opinion or repeat a brand’s preferred message.

We may decline content containing abuse, unrelated material, another person’s private information, unlawful content or claims that cannot lawfully be published, regardless of whether the overall review is positive or negative.

If an edit is needed for clarity, privacy or compliance, we preserve the reviewer’s meaning, rating and sentiment. Where an issue cannot be resolved without changing the substance of the review, we seek clarification or a revised submission from the participant, or decline publication.

What happens when we identify a problem?

If content may not meet our requirements, we may:

• request additional information or verification;
• ask the participant to correct or replace the affected content;
• decline to publish the content;
• remove content that has already been published; or
• restrict participation in future review programs where appropriate.

Requests for replacement content are intended to resolve authenticity or content issues, never to obtain a more favourable opinion.

We may also review previously published content if new information indicates that it may not meet these standards.

Incentives and transparency

Some UPRIVA review campaigns are funded by brands or businesses. Participants may receive free products, vouchers, reimbursement or other incentives to help them purchase or experience what they are reviewing.

These arrangements do not entitle a brand to a positive review or to have genuine criticism suppressed.

Where reviews are collected through an incentivised campaign, we clearly identify this alongside the review or through a prominent disclosure applying to the relevant group of reviews. Readers should not have to consult this policy to discover that an incentive was provided.

We also disclose relevant brand-funded campaign arrangements and other material connections so readers understand the context in which reviews were collected.

Receiving an incentive does not guarantee that a review will be published. Publication depends on meeting the standards in this policy, not on providing a favourable rating.

Raising a concern or querying a decision

If you believe a review is fake or misleading, that content has been used without permission, or that your submission has been incorrectly rejected or removed, please contact us at mums@mouthsofmums.com.au.

Please include the review or content link, the reason for your concern and any supporting information.

We will assess relevant information and, where appropriate, conduct human review of disputed authenticity or moderation decisions. We may request further information, correct or remove content, or reinstate a submission where appropriate.

Our responsibility

We recognise that no automated system can determine with absolute certainty whether an individual consumer’s experience is genuine.

UPRIVA does not rely on a single AI detector, image detector or other automated tool. We use a combination of technology, review signals and human assessment to identify and address potentially fake or misleading content.

Our aim is to protect the integrity of the consumer feedback we collect while ensuring genuine consumers are treated fairly.

Our standard

Real experience. Honest opinion. Original content. Transparent incentives.

We will continue to improve our review integrity processes as new forms of review manipulation and AI-generated content emerge.

Last updated: October 2026