Removals Guaranteed? Really?

Not long ago, our system picked up a negative Google review for a member of ours. The rating was one star and the comment was information-poor, meaning that it gave no specific information about the practice, the experience, or any kind of results. Further, the office could not identify the reviewer as a patient in their records.

We assessed that though the review was far from flattering, none of Google’s Review Guidelines had been violated. The list of sites that require verification that a user patronized a business or purchased a product is short and Google isn’t on it. Our team sent an alert email to triage the problem, advising the office to respond and offering a suggested reply.

As most offices would rather content like this not exist on their Google listing at all, the member understandably and appropriately asked if it could be removed since “It does not in any way refer to a medical procedure.” A valid question, as most readers are looking for information about wait times, visit experience, the acumen of the administrative staff, and, chiefly, the quality of care/results. Meaning, the stuff that matters. (BTW, looking at the example above, if arrogance was a disqualifying feature to be a surgeon, there would not be many surgeons left. Full disclosure, I’m a surgeon – though a non-arrogant surgeon 😊 )

Unfortunately, such vetting is not a requirement for Google reviews. While medically based review sites like Healthgrades, WebMD, RateMDs, etc… might have sympathy, business sites like Google and Yelp take a broader view of the consumer experience and allow more general comments. In view of Google policies, the review was not a good candidate for removal. This was not the news our member was hoping for.

Coincidentally, unsolicited, another organization contacted the practice and gave our member an amazingly positive outlook. Another company who had been cold calling them, insisting they could get bad reviews taken down, reached out again for this review. The office told them to try and in two days it WAS gone, as well as five other one-star reviews from users not identified as patients.

A seemingly great outcome for the practice.

Well, we had egg on our face. So, we looked a little deeper.

Upon comparison of the reviews picked up by our system and the new state of member’s profile, we identified that 6 of the last 7 negative reviews had indeed been removed, taking the rating score from 4.8 to 4.9. These previous reviews had been similarly diagnosed as not violating any Google guidelines. The comments were unique, with passable syntax, and seemed vaguely relevant to the practice if not short on details. These “reviewers” weren’t identifiable as patients, either. If these reviews had come in a short window of time, as do incentivized negative campaigns from bad actors on the web, a pattern may have been more noticeable. However, this activity was spread out of the course of 2 years. It is notable that this removal company had been contacting the office to offer support for some time.

The miraculous “success” of this other group prompted a few questions which our member graciously answered. We asked about the name of the company, whether Google My Business profile access was granted to them, and what type of receipt or documentation was offered once removal was achieved.

Here, the business operates on a “pay nothing until it’s removed” basis. Meaning, you take no risk. It costs nothing to say yes, so give it a try. Or does it?

Of concern was the timing and the questionable method of the removals. Our member noted company’s successful removal of the reviews took “two days.” However, the typical legitimate process of reporting/appealing takes a week or longer.  While any Google user can “report a review”, by clicking the flag button and selecting a category, this typically does not result in removal except in glaringly obvious violations (racist comments, threats, etc…).

Only those with manager or owner-level access to the Google My Business suite can act on behalf of a business in the legitimate Google review moderation process. This entails logging in to Google’s Review Management Tool, flagging the review as a representative of the business, and later submitting an appeal, providing verbiage as to why a review violates guidelines. Once this is done, an alert is sent with receipt of the report to the email that manages the profile. Later, another email is sent with Google’s decision. No such access was granted, and no such alerts were sent by Google nor provided by the review removal company. Strange, indeed.

Because Google requires 3 business days to process the initial flag and another 3-5 business days to process the appeal, the entire process typically takes more than a week. It raised an eyebrow when these removals occurred so quickly and without such access or notifications. Of further concern is that once Google has rendered an appeal decision, the review is no longer selectable for appeal. One of these removed reviews had already been submitted through this process by our team and so, was no longer available to even flag/appeal.

If such a company has access to other avenues not available to others, it would be intriguing to see if they could, indeed, remove the rest of the negative comments from the profile. They couldn’t. They apparently only took aim at the information-poor “Bad doctor” reviews. Leaving the 4 paragraph, detail-rich missives unresolved.

To be clear, there are only two entities that can reliably remove negative Google reviews: Google content moderators and the user who posted the review. Based on our knowledge of Google guidelines and processes and the fact that in the example above, removal had been denied on one of these reviews already, it seems highly unlikely that Google breached its rules and was the removing entity.

What’s the likelier explanation then? Would a company based outside the U.S. periodically create review accounts, post negative ratings/comments, concurrently contact the business out of concern for their reputation, offering “no pay until reviews removed” terms, and then accept payment when the content (they likely posted) comes down? Are there people out there who would spike your coffee with laxatives and then conveniently sell you Imodium? Or would Google give special backdoor permissions and access to an organization to remove reviews outside the publicly available methods and processes for profit, completely undermining the legitimacy of their platform?

To us, one seems more likely than the other.

We don’t doubt that, periodically, this organization will continue to be able to deliver on the guarantee. As “new reviews” are posted from users who aren’t identifiable as specific patients, they will be able to remove them faster than any legitimate reputation management group for a not-so-modest price. Our advice to the member after thanking them for years of (successful) membership was to explain our concerns and encourage them to proceed with caution.

Once you have paid the dealer, the dealer knows how to serve his customer with the desired fix.

What do you think?