Removal is usually not available for accurate content on somebody else's site. What is available is publishing enough genuine material that the old result moves down, plus a small number of specific requests that occasionally succeed for outdated or removed pages.

The three situations

They have different answers, so the first step is identifying which applies.

Accurate and still relevant. A poor review, a legitimate complaint, a news item about something that happened. Removal is not available and should not be expected.

Accurate but obsolete. A dispute that was resolved, a business that no longer operates that way, a listing for a location you left. Still true when written, misleading now.

Inaccurate. A factual error, mistaken identity, or a listing containing wrong information. This one has actual routes available.

What the search engine will and will not do

Search engines index what exists. They generally will not remove accurate content from results at the subject's request.

What they do handle: removing results for pages that no longer exist or have already been taken down, which is a refresh request rather than a removal. Updating results where a page has changed but the old version is still showing. And a narrow set of removals for specific categories such as certain personal information.

Canada does not have a general right to erasure comparable to some other jurisdictions, and the question has been the subject of ongoing legal consideration rather than a settled mechanism. Assuming a removal right exists is the wrong starting point.

So the realistic order is: get the source changed if you can, and otherwise work on what ranks above it.

Going to the source

The only route that actually removes something, and it works more often than people expect for the obsolete category.

A polite, factual message to whoever controls the page, explaining what has changed and asking for an update rather than a deletion. Publications and directories will sometimes add an update note, correct a detail, or remove an entry for a business that no longer operates.

What does not work: legal threats as an opening move, which frequently produce a defensive response and occasionally more attention than the original item had. That is worth being careful about.

Where the content is genuinely defamatory or contains information you have a right to have corrected, that is a matter for a lawyer rather than a marketing decision, and the assessment is worth getting before acting.

Suppression, which is what usually works

Not a trick. Publishing enough genuine material about your business that the old result is pushed down by things that are more relevant and more recent.

The mechanism is straightforward: results are ordered by relevance and authority, and an old page on a third-party site loses ground to a well-maintained site, active profiles, and recent material as those accumulate.

What contributes:

Six to ten genuine properties is generally enough to fill the first page for a small business name, which is what pushes a single old item onto the second.

How long it takes

Months rather than weeks, and it depends on how established the negative result is.

Something on a major news site with years of standing is difficult to displace. A forum post or a small directory entry moves more easily. Setting the expectation honestly matters here, since this is an area where businesses are sold quick results that do not exist.

Anyone offering guaranteed removal of accurate third-party content is describing something they cannot deliver.

The thing not to do

Drawing attention to it.

Publicly disputing an old item, responding at length years later, or having several accounts post about it produces new pages about the same subject, which is the opposite of the objective.

Where a response is warranted, a single measured reply on the original platform is the whole of it, and then the effort goes into what ranks above it rather than into arguing.

The preventative version

Most of the suppression work is the same work that should be happening anyway.

A business with a maintained site, complete profiles, accumulating reviews, and occasional local coverage has a first page it controls, and a single old item never reaches a position where it matters.

That is considerably easier than building it under pressure, which is the argument for searching your own name periodically rather than only after something appears, as covered in what happens when someone searches your business name.

Frequently asked questions

Can I get negative content removed from search results?

Rarely, for accurate content on somebody else's site. Search engines index what exists and generally will not remove accurate material at the subject's request.

What removal requests do work?

Refresh requests for pages that no longer exist or have already been taken down, updates where a page has changed, and a narrow set of specific personal information categories.

What should I do about outdated but accurate content?

Go to the source. A polite factual message explaining what has changed frequently gets an update note, a correction, or removal of an entry for a business that no longer operates.

What is suppression?

Publishing enough genuine material about your business that the old result is pushed down. Six to ten real properties generally fill a first page for a small business name.

How long does it take?

Months rather than weeks, depending on how established the negative result is. Anyone guaranteeing removal of accurate third-party content is describing something they cannot deliver.

What should I avoid doing?

Drawing attention to it. Publicly disputing an old item years later produces new pages about the same subject, which is the opposite of the objective.

West Coast Media Solutions Inc. provides web design, web development, hosting, digital marketing, and business consulting to organisations across Canada, drawing on more than twenty-five years in the field.

Something from years ago still on the first page for your name?

We build out the properties that push it down, which is slower than a promise of removal and actually works.

Start a Conversation