Google's Two-Star Review

458 Words1 Page

While going through reviews on Google, a two-star review for the Panda Express across from Waterford Lakes Town Center was found that did not seem to make a valid argument. The person that wrote the review was claiming that this restaurant is in an unsafe neighborhood. The experience that led to this conclusion was while waiting in the restaurant for 5 minutes with his wife outside, that this “was all the time it took for some creep dressed in full camo to gravitate towards her and ask "Can I interest you in some protection?".” The reviewer had stated that he had confronted another person at the theater across the street with similar mannerisms. Due to his experience, he believes that Waterford Lakes Shopping Center “attracts white trash and scary meth heads.” …show more content…

To start with, The fallacy of coincidence, also know as Post hoc ergo propter hoc, is used by the customer with the presumption that since he has had a crummy experience in that area that if he goes to this restaurant again, then he will have another experience that is unacceptable. There is not enough evidence to support this theory. As a result of the experience he had with the people he considered “white trash” or “scary meth heads,” the customer made a hasty generalization that the general area as a whole attracts people with these specific characteristics. There is not just one group of people that visit that shopping center, but a diverse populous that frequents this area. Lastly, this customer has come to an irrelevant thesis. The review the customer is leaving is for Panda Express, not the area surrounding this restaurant. However, this is all he seems to talk about in his review excluding one mention that the restaurant has "great food." The restaurant has no association with the random person who caused this lousy experience for this

Open Document