I never read the comment section of any video, or news article. Most people have legit no clue what they are talking about. I actually learned that from Reddit. The number of times you go into the comment section, and see the top comment is full of shit is staggering. This is usually about politics and other stuff though. In terms of product review, it honestly depends on the product I'm looking for if it's something non-tech I will usually just take whatever has a decent rating-to-price ratio. If it is highly technical, then I usually have to consult a lot more than just the reviews, ratings, and critics. For example I did extensive research on all things involving computer components, before I built my first tower. I knew the essentials of every piece and why spending a hundred to two hundred dollars on what people considered "non-essential" or "high-end" was actually worth it for the amount of life you can get out of those components. Rotten Tomatoes I have to say I often look to. In my defense I will say that if the critic score is shitty, but the audience rating is high I will still see a movie.
On hubski there was a discussion around a relevant observation, the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect: Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect works as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray’s case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward-reversing cause and effect. I call these the “wet streets cause rain” stories. Paper’s full of them. In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story-and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read with renewed interest as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about far-off Palestine than it was about the story you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know. That is the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. I’d point out it does not operate in other arenas of life. In ordinary life, if somebody consistently exaggerates or lies to you, you soon discount everything they say. In court, there is the legal doctrine of falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, which means untruthful in one part, untruthful in all. But when it comes to the media, we believe against evidence that it is probably worth our time to read other parts of the paper. When, in fact, it almost certainly isn’t. The only possible explanation for our behavior is amnesia.Media carries with it a credibility that is totally undeserved. You have all experienced this, in what I call the Murray Gell-Mann Amnesia effect. (I call it by this name because I once discussed it with Murray Gell-Mann, and by dropping a famous name I imply greater importance to myself, and to the effect, than it would otherwise have.)