Quick answer: Identify the exact passage, explain the verifiable error or missing development, and send a concise request through the publisher’s editorial process. A correction, an update, and full article removal are different requests.
Need help with a specific result? Negative news assessment can help you organize the issue and next steps.
On this page: Choose the request that fits the facts · Build a small evidence packet · Adapt this request template · Track the editorial outcome and search follow-up.
Choose the request that fits the facts
A correction addresses something factually wrong. An update adds a later development. A redaction asks to remove a specific detail, while deletion asks to remove the whole article. Decide which outcome is justified before contacting the publication.
For example, a report can accurately describe an arrest at the time of publication while omitting a later dismissal. In that situation, lead with the documented later outcome rather than claiming the original report never had a basis.
Build a small evidence packet
Save the article URL, title, publication date, exact disputed wording, and proposed correction. Add a reliable supporting source for each factual change. If you have a court document, confirm what it says and whether sharing it is appropriate.
Use a two-column comparison: published statement and supported replacement. This makes the request easy to evaluate. Avoid attaching an entire archive of unrelated records or copying a long group of staff into the first message.
| Request | Useful evidence |
|---|---|
| Correction | A specific false statement and reliable replacement |
| Update | A later documented event |
| Redaction | The exact detail and reason for reviewing it |
| Removal | A stated basis for deleting the whole page |
Adapt this request template
Subject: Request to review a factual correction or update — [article title]. Message: “Hello [editor], I am contacting you about [URL]. The passage [short passage] states [claim]. I am requesting [specific correction or update] because [verified reason]. This supporting source documents the change: [URL or appropriate attachment]. Proposed wording: [neutral wording]. Please let me know if you need additional information. Thank you.”
Keep the requested wording neutral. Remove unsupported accusations, threats, and predictions about damages from an editorial request. If there is a legal dispute, consult a qualified attorney about legal correspondence separately.
Track the editorial outcome and search follow-up
Record who received the request, when it was sent, the response, and any change to the page. Read the full updated article before calling the issue resolved. A new paragraph might fix one problem while the headline or caption remains inaccurate.
If the source changes but Google retains old text, evaluate the outdated-content process. If the publisher declines, our news assessment can help distinguish further correction options from suppression and monitoring.
Frequently asked questions
Must a publisher delete an article when I ask?
Do not assume that. Editorial decisions and any legal duties depend on the facts and applicable law.
Should I contact Google first?
If the issue is a factual error in the article, evaluate the source correction first. Google’s policies and legal processes are separate assessments.
Get a clear next step
Send the public URLs and a short explanation through our free Google reputation assessment form. Ask for a defined scope before paid work begins. For other concerns, explore the Google Removal Center.
Sources and review date
Google: Refresh Outdated Content · Google: remove web results. Guidance checked October 20, 2026; review current platform instructions before submitting.
Google Reputation Manager is independent of Google. This article provides general information, not legal advice. Publishers and platforms make their own decisions.