Burma Social apologises for fake reviews as CCS uncovers wider operation

Burma Social has issued a public apology after procuring fake positive reviews, following an investigation by the Competition and Consumer Commission of Singapore (CCS) into businesses that paid for fabricated online reviews.

In its apology, the Singapore restaurant acknowledged that the reviews were posted on one or more online review platforms and that its conduct constituted an unfair practice under the Consumer Protection (Fair Trading) Act.

“Fake reviews can mislead consumers and undermine their ability to make informed purchasing decisions,” said Burma Social, adding that it regretted its conduct and had taken corrective measures to remove the reviews and prevent similar practices from recurring.

Don't miss: SG consumer watchdog CCCS to regulate product safety in expanded role

The apology comes as CCS takes enforcement action against 45 businesses and a fake review provider following what it described as its largest fake review investigation to date in terms of the number of businesses involved.

CCS found that Julian Tung Yan Kai, through businesses and websites he owns and operates, had provided fake review services to approximately 100 businesses. Tung is the sole director of Reputifly and owns and operates BuyReviewSG and GetReviewSG, which offered fake review services to businesses.

How the fake review machine worked

According to the regulator, businesses could purchase packages of fake reviews to be posted periodically, while a rating calculator allowed clients to determine how many five-star reviews were needed to reach a desired Google rating.

The operation also used generative AI to produce reviews designed to resemble genuine customer experiences. CCS said the technology was used to vary writing styles and sentence structures, incorporate Singapore-specific details and introduce natural imperfections, while clients could edit the generated reviews before they were published.

The provider later introduced an online dashboard that allowed businesses to generate, manage and track fake reviews. It could draw from a business' existing four- and five-star Google reviews to generate new ones containing relevant details.

Some reviews were also written to describe initial reservations about a business before recounting a positive experience, in an effort to make them appear more authentic.

Individuals were recruited through Telegram accounts and channels and offered payment to post prepared reviews and ratings. They were also instructed to avoid duplicate reviews to reduce the likelihood of detection, according to CCS.

Of the 47 businesses investigated during the first phase of the probe, 45 admitted to procuring and purchasing fake reviews, some or all of which were subsequently posted on online review platforms.

CCS said the reviews were presented as genuine customer experiences and could have led consumers to believe the businesses, products or services involved were more popular or positively received than they actually were.

Following the investigation, the 45 businesses provided undertakings to cease procuring or posting fake reviews and other unfair practices. They are also required to identify and remove fake reviews, report their progress to CCS, strengthen compliance measures and prominently display a public apology for six months across their websites, official social media accounts and physical premises or outlets.

The fake review provider has similarly committed to stop offering the services and facilitating unfair practices, as well as publish an apology on Reputifly's website for six months. It has also voluntarily committed to donating proceeds obtained from its fake review services to an Institution of a Public Character of its choice.

Meanwhile, CCS said two of the 47 businesses investigated in the first phase declined to provide undertakings on its required terms. The regulator will continue investigating the businesses and may take firmer enforcement action if supported by its findings.

A second phase of the investigation is also underway and extends beyond the remaining businesses to others that may have procured fake review services from the provider.

“In the digital age, consumers increasingly rely on online reviews to decide what to buy and which businesses to trust. They should be able to expect that these reviews reflect genuine experiences, not manufactured ones,” said Alvin Koh, chief executive of CCS.

Koh added that fake reviews deceive consumers, distort competition and disadvantage businesses that compete honestly, stressing that CCS would pursue both businesses purchasing fake reviews and those profiting from supplying them.

The action follows other recent CCS interventions over potentially misleading digital practices. Last year, the regulator took action against Courts and PRISM+ over website design features that it said misled consumers and pressured them into unintended purchases.

CCS found that Courts had automatically added unsolicited items to shoppers' carts during certain promotions, putting consumers at risk of paying for products they did not intend to buy. Courts made changes after CCS intervened in June 2025.

Related articles: 
foodpanda warned over 'misleading' free delivery ad for pandapro   
Grab Singapore's Trans-cab acquisition may violate competition law, says CCCS
AirAsia accepts MalaysiaNow's apology over misleading articles