Google review - ANY option for false information?

[sd1111]

Has anyone had any luck getting a review removed because it is misleading and false?

I just had a contact randomly receive a negative review regarding a situation 3 years ago. During COVID, the client refused to follow any safety protocols for a large event, and the event planner cancelled their contract for safety reasons, with a full refund.

The review suggests that this business "stole her money" which is a highly damaging claim.

Any idea what the business owner can do? Are there any protections for pandemic-related reviews? Obviously, flagging the review has gotten us nowhere with Google.

I'd appreciate any help!

 

[bluetech2003]

Has anyone had any luck getting a review removed because it is misleading and false?

I just had a contact randomly receive a negative review regarding a situation 3 years ago. During COVID, the client refused to follow any safety protocols for a large event, and the event planner cancelled their contract for safety reasons, with a full refund.

The review suggests that this business "stole her money" which is a highly damaging claim.

Any idea what the business owner can do? Are there any protections for pandemic-related reviews? Obviously, flagging the review has gotten us nowhere with Google.

I'd appreciate any help!

Yes. An 'agency' was fired by client. In response this 'agency' placed 6 one star reviews. Google took down these fake reviews after being flagged. I salute google for these.

On the other hand, innocent small businesses have been casualties of google hard suspensions, and google treating these as acceptable attritions frustrating the innocent... Btw I dont blame google bot or google ai --- blame the geniuses responsible for coding and releasing these to the public. Think about this: a client updates their NEW gbp profile attributes as woman-owned etc and get hard suspended! Why is this necessary? Why take down the profile? Maybe just suspend access to the profile? Isnt This opressive to a business that just got video verified? Oh wellmoving forward We are getting clients into Apple Business connect and other sites and they're getting some attention.

 

[JS Girard]

In so far as SMBs don't pay for GBP, I'm persistently surprised Google pretends to care about data quality or support at all.

 

[mattstephenskc]

I hear you, SD1111. This sort of thing should be covered by libel/slander laws. By providing a public forum (not to mention one with a practical monopoly) with the express purpose of exchanging accurate information about businesses, Google is responsible to those with a material stake in the validity of such information to ensure its validity to the best of their ability. Yet they’ve refused to do so despite having readily available the means to do so.

Google is crooked, and needs to be held accountable. Perhaps a class action is in order.

 

[bluetech2003]

I hear you, SD1111. This sort of thing should be covered by libel/slander laws. By providing a public forum (not to mention one with a practical monopoly) with the express purpose of exchanging accurate information about businesses, Google is responsible to those with a material stake in the validity of such information to ensure its validity to the best of their ability. Yet they’ve refused to do so despite having readily available the means to do so.

Google is crooked, and needs to be held accountable. Perhaps a class action is in order.

Great point. Granted GBP is a free service and there are bad actors, does not release them from liability for harm done to those using their service in good faith. Maybe laws needed to be looked at again.

 

[mattstephenskc]

We've gotten a wave of slanderous, baseless 1-star reviews from family law clients over the last month or so. One guy wrote two, and got two loyalists to write two more criticizing a particular attorney of ours. We know the allegations are false and defamatory, but due to confidentiality, we can't advocate for ourselves in public.

There is an option for reporting a review on the basis of misleading content.

In the present scenario, any of the following could apply:

Misrepresentation

• False or misleading accounts of the description or quality of a good or service.
• Distorting or omitting information that could have an undue impact on user decision making.
• Distorting or omitting facts to scam other users.

Gibberish & repetitive content

• Posting the same content multiple times or posting content for the same place from multiple accounts.

Any hunches as to which one is most likely to succeed? Does anyone have quantitative data on the success rate of reports on these bases?

 

[mattstephenskc]

FWIW, the guy is also passively blackmailing us, saying he'll remove the reviews if we refund all his attorney fees.