The Princeton Review

Test preparation providers have been criticized in the past on the grounds that their courses claim larger score increases than they deliver.[9]

College rankings, including those published by the Princeton Review, have been criticized for failing to be accurate or comprehensive by assigning objective rankings formed from subjective opinions.[10] Princeton Review officials counter that their rankings are unique in that they rely on student opinion and not just on statistical data.[11][12]

In 2002 an American Medical Association affiliated program, A Matter of Degree,[13] funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, criticized the Princeton Review list of Best Party Schools.[14] USA Today published an editorial titled "Sobering Statistics"[15] in August 2002 and stated, "the doctor's group goes too far in suggesting that the rankings contribute to the problem (of campus drinking)." The editorial noted the fact that among the schools the AMA program was then funding as part of its campaign against campus drinking, six of 10 of those schools calling for The Princeton Review to "drop the annual ranking...had made (Princeton Review's) past top-party-school lists: many times for some. That's no coincidence." The editorial commended The Princeton Review for reporting the list, calling it "a public service" for "student applicants and their parents".

Rankings for LGBT-related lists have also been criticized as inaccurate due to outdated methodologies.[16] The Princeton Review bases its LGBT-Friendly and LGBT-Unfriendly [17] top twenty ranking lists, which asks undergraduates: "Do students, faculty, and administrators at your college treat all persons equally regardless of their sexual orientations and gender identify/expression?" The Princeton Review also publishes The Gay & Lesbian Guide to College Life.[18][19]

In 2016, the company was criticized by privacy rights advocates who worry that a company that owns online dating and college preparation services could amass data and exploit it in a way that preys on unsuspecting consumers, particularly younger people.[20] "Do parents know that when their underage kids enroll for exam prep or tutoring, personal information may be shared with hookup sites that could then target their kids to become customers?" asked one critic, who concluded that the company "makes no guarantee that data sharing among its entities will not include those customers whose sole aim is to improve their grades and test scores."[21] Indeed, another critic points out that The Princeton Review "policy states 'we may collect certain information from your computer each time you visit our site'—information like data 'regarding your academic and extracurricular activities and interests.' That information can be used to 'send you email notices and offers; perform research and analysis about your use of or interest in our products, services or products or services offered by others; [and] develop and display content and advertising tailored to your interests on our site and other sites.'"[22]