Reviews, comments, and customer photos on a cannabis site carry three sets of rules: the FTC's Endorsement Guides, which require incentivized reviews to say so; Google's review policies, which prohibit gating and cherry-picking; and age-related duties, from 21+ context to COPPA. Section 230 helps with some liability. It does not make user claims harmless.
Reviews are endorsements
The FTC's Endorsement Guides cover customer reviews, not just influencer posts. A free product, a discount, or entry into a giveaway in exchange for a review creates a material connection, and the review has to disclose it. The FTC has also finalized a rule against fake and deceptive reviews — buying positive reviews, posting insider reviews without disclosure, and suppressing honest negative ones are all squarely prohibited. Enforcement aims at the business that solicits the reviews, not only the people who write them.
No gating, no cherry-picking
Review gating means surveying customers first and steering only the happy ones toward leaving a public review. Google prohibits it outright, and violations can get reviews filtered or pulled. The on-site version has its own problem: displaying only positive reviews while quietly deleting negatives can misrepresent what customers actually think, which is exactly the conduct the FTC's review rule targets. Ask everyone. Publish what comes back, minus the posts your written guidelines exclude.
Moderate the claims, gate the ages
A customer writing "this cured my arthritis" on a product page puts a disease claim on your commerce page, and FDA warning letters have cited testimonials on product sites, not just brand copy. Moderate disease claims out of product-page reviews, or route them away from commerce entirely. On age: run the 21+ gate your market expects, and keep any interactive feature far from under-13 data collection, which is COPPA territory no cannabis site should approach. Section 230 shields sites from many claims based on third-party content, but it is a litigation defense — a state cannabis regulator reading testimonials on your product page is not the audience it was built for.
Worked example: the incentivized review ask
Fails: an email blast reading "Leave us a 5-star review and get 20% off your next order." It buys a rating, produces undisclosed incentivized reviews, and if pointed at Google, violates review policies that ban incentivized reviews entirely.
Passes: "Tell us how it went — honest feedback helps other customers. Reviewers get 10% off their next order, whatever they write, and published reviews are labeled to show a discount was offered." Incentive disclosed, all ratings welcome, and Google reviews left out of the offer.
- Incentivized reviews need a visible disclosure, and the FTC's review rule reaches the business that solicits them.
- Google prohibits review gating; on-site cherry-picking draws FTC attention.
- User health claims on product pages read like your claims; moderate them out.
- Section 230 is a liability defense, not a marketing-compliance pass.
Frequently asked questions
Do incentivized reviews have to be labeled?
Yes. A discount or freebie in exchange for a review is a material connection under the FTC's Endorsement Guides, and the review needs to disclose it. Google is stricter: its policies bar incentivized Google reviews entirely, so keep offers pointed at your own site.
What is review gating and why does it matter?
Gating is filtering customers by sentiment first and inviting only the satisfied ones to post publicly. Google prohibits the practice, and suppressing negative reviews can also violate the FTC's rule on consumer reviews. Invite everyone or invite no one.
Does Section 230 protect my site from what reviewers write?
Partially. It shields sites from many legal claims based on third-party content, but it does not stop a regulator from treating a testimonial displayed on your product page as part of your marketing. Moderation still matters.
Should I delete a review that claims a health benefit?
Remove or relocate reviews that say a product treats or cures a condition, because FDA warning letters have cited exactly that kind of testimonial. Deleting a disease claim is content moderation, not gating; the review's star rating is not the issue.
General information for cannabis marketers, not legal advice.
Want this done for your brand?
We build cannabis & CBD search visibility with full transparency, for dispensaries, brands, and MSOs.
Get a free cannabis SEO audit ›