A negative news article should not be the first thing people see when they Google your name.

Sometimes. It depends on who published it, whether it is true, whether it is defamatory, and whether the outlet is willing to talk. A handful of articles get removed outright. Most get corrected, updated, or suppressed with stronger content built around your name. We will not tell you it is a guaranteed removal because it is not. What we can tell you, after we look at the actual article and outlet, is which path fits your case.

This is the most common version of this problem. An old arrest, a bad business decision, a lawsuit that got settled years ago. Google does not care that you have changed. It just keeps serving up the same headline. In cases like this, removal usually is not realistic, so the work becomes building a stronger, more current story about who you are now and pushing it above the old one.

You can, and sometimes it works. But going in without a strategy can lock a reporter into publicly defending the story, which makes it harder for anyone to unwind later, including us. If the article is fresh, talk to us before you reach out so we can tell you whether a direct approach helps your case or hurts it.

There is no honest way to give you a number without seeing the article, the domain authority behind it, and what else is competing for your name in search. Some cases move in weeks. Others take months of consistent work. We will give you a real timeline once we have actually looked at your search results, not before.

That is usually the first thing we fix. Weak or missing branded content is one of the biggest reasons negative articles rank as high as they do. Building out the assets that should already be outranking that story is often the fastest lever we can pull.

Screenshot it, save the URL, and do not respond to the outlet or the poster until you have talked to us. Reactions in the first 48 hours matter more than people realize. Send it to us and we will tell you straight what we are looking at.

Yes. A negative news article that ranks well in Google is almost certainly being read by AI tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, and Perplexity as well. When the article is the loudest thing about you online, the AI uses it as source material and presents it as the answer. Fixing the article ranking directly affects what AI says about you.

That is extremely common. One story gets picked up and lands on multiple sites within days. We look at the whole picture, every place it lives, and build a strategy around all of it. You do not have to find every copy. That is part of what the assessment covers.

Removal means the article or page comes down entirely. Correction means the outlet updates or fixes inaccurate details but the story stays up. Suppression means the article stays exactly where it is, and stronger, more accurate content is built and strengthened so it ranks above it. Most cases end up using a mix of these, not just one. See removal vs. suppression for a full breakdown.

The right to be forgotten is primarily a European legal framework and generally does not apply to search results or publishers in the United States. US cases usually rely on different tools: direct outlet correction requests, documented factual errors, defamation review, platform-specific policies, and suppression through stronger content. This is general information, not legal advice, and a licensed attorney can advise on your specific jurisdiction.

Rarely, and only in narrow circumstances such as certain legal violations, doxxing-style personal information, or specific policy breaches. Google generally does not remove a news article simply because the subject does not like it. Most of the leverage lives with the publisher or with building stronger competing content, not with a direct request to Google.