As noted in the article, returns are high volume and it's hard to thoroughly inspect every item. Somebody on a line probably saw a package that looked like it h

As noted in the article, returns are high volume and it's hard to thoroughly inspect every item. Somebody on a line probably saw a package that looked like it hadn't even been opened, and said "cool, that's an unopened return, I don't have to spend time on that one, on to the next item". They made a mistake. It's not that it isn't bad, it's that it's bound to happen. The bigger issue is used items being sold as new. That could be a mistake too, except it happens way too often to be a mistake. That's lawsuit territory. Amazon needs to fix that. But to me, the more interesting issue is how one bad review can tank a business. I'm assuming that's what happened in this case, and that's how the article portrays it. Of course, Amazon should have removed the review in question, because it was ultimately their fault and not the business'. However, my hot take is that I think prospective buyers are at fault for seeing a product with an overwhelming number of positive reviews, then seeing one bad review, and thinking "Gross, I won't buy these diapers, the company sells them with shit inside!!!"