Google's Harassment policy. Threats and doxxing in a review.

Reviewed by Doug Baker, founder · Updated September 23, 2026 · Policy text snapshot August 2026

Illustration: a street with a small shop under a green awning and, at the left, the owner's house drawn in plain gray. Five people post a one-star review from a phone. Four of the review cards are drawn in red and labelled with what the words do: Threat of harm, a man in a dark jacket at the closed gate of the house; Doxxing, a man on a bench; Unwanted sexualization, a man leaning on a lamppost outside the shop while an employee in the green apron stands in the doorway; Pointing readers at a named person, a woman with two people reading over her shoulder. At the far right, apart, an ordinary customer beside a gray pickup truck posts a one-star review drawn in plain gray, labelled Insult, no threat.

Illustration: two people on the pavement, each posting a one-star review from a phone. At the left, at the closed gate of the owner's house, a man in a dark jacket; his review card is drawn in red. At the right, apart from him, an ordinary customer; his review card is drawn in plain gray. Labels: Threat of harm, Insult, no threat.

Five people post a one-star review, and Google's harassment policy reaches four: a threat, a home address, sexual claims about an employee, and a call for others to join in. The fifth is an insult with none of that in it, and none of the policy's listed clauses reaches it.

Two people post a one-star review. The harassment policy reaches the one whose review threatens harm. None of its clauses reaches the one whose review only insults.

Harassment is Google's name for a review posted to harass a person or a business, or to get other people to join in. It names three things. A threat against you, your staff, or your family. A home address typed into the review text. Sexual claims about someone who works for you. It says nothing about how cruel a review is. So an insult with none of those things in it trips none of the clauses Google lists. Google's Offensive content section may still reach it, and that's a separate question.

Two similar reviews. One breaks the policy.

Same trade, same one star, opposite answers. Both are invented. No real business and no real person.

Breaks the policy

Grant H.

Strong grounds for removal

★★★★★sample

Brought my car in for a brake job, got charged double the quote, and the owner Dave laughed about it. [The review then states, in explicit terms, that the writer is coming to Dave's house this week to make him regret it. Described here, not reproduced.] If anyone wants to take it up with him at home, he's at 1400 Placeholder Ave and his cell is 555-0100.

HarassmentThreat of harmDoxxingPointing readers at a named person

Breaks it, on three counts. The described line is a specific threat of harm, the address and cell number are doxxing, and the last sentence sends other readers to his home.

Doesn't break it

Linda S.

No grounds for removal

★★★★★sample

Second time this shop has had my truck for a transmission leak, and the second time it came back leaking within a week. Two weeks without a vehicle, $1,900 gone, and when I asked for a refund the manager told me the warranty had expired on a repair that never worked. Dishonest work. I wouldn't send anyone here.

Does not coverInsult, no threat

Doesn't break it. The anger is about a repair that failed twice and a refund refused, and nothing in it threatens anyone, publishes a private detail, sexualizes a person, or sends readers after someone.

The policy

Harassment in plain terms

Google names three things here. A specific threat of harm. Doxxing. Unwanted sexualization of a person. Its opening line adds one more, telling other people to join in, and it covers harassment aimed at your business, not only at a person.

Breaks the policy

Threat of harm
A specific threat of harm.
The review says the writer will come to the owner's house this week and hurt him.
Doxxing
Doxxing.
A home address, a personal cell number, or a non-public employee's full name printed in the review.
Unwanted sexualization
Unwanted sexualization of a person.
Claims about a named employee's sexual activity, orientation, or gender identity.
Pointing readers at a named person
Pointing readers at a named person.
A review that tells other readers to go after someone. Google's own line bans encouraging others to participate, and this is that.
Insult, no threat
Does not cover
A review that insults you, calls your work dishonest, or is simply cruel, and does none of the four things above. None of Google's harassment clauses reaches it. Google's Offensive content section might.

Doxxing needs a definition, because Google's policy lists the word and nothing else. The definition is in Google's glossary. Google defines doxxing as digging up private or identifying details about a person or an organization and putting them online, usually to do harm. In a review, that's the address, the personal number, the photograph of a person, the full name of an employee the public doesn't have. The test is whether the review published something private or identifying. What your listing already publishes isn't private. A home address is. Which clause the words trip is the argument you file. That argument is what Google reads when it decides whether your Google review can be removed.

Does yours break it?

What does not count as harassment?

An insult on its own isn't one of the things Google lists. If a review has no threat, no private detail, nothing sexual about a person, and no call for others to join in, it trips none of Google's harassment clauses. Google's harassment section never says what it does allow. Not one line of it. The boundary sits a few headings down in the same document, under Offensive content.

That's where a personal insult actually sits. Google lists using its products to attack people or groups as offensive content, and in the same section it allows a negative experience told respectfully. Google's reporting page has its own line for owners. Don't report a review only because you don't agree with it or don't like it. Google stays out of disputes between a business and its customers.

So a one-star calling your work sloppy and your prices a ripoff is ugly, and it trips no harassment clause. Among the sections that judge the words, Offensive content is the one left where it could have grounds for removal, and that section allows a bad experience told respectfully. People who file these for a living say an honest negative review doesn't come down. That's their read, not a number Google publishes.

No grounds for removal

This is where we say no. If a review is vicious but has none of those four things in it, the harassment clauses give it no grounds. And if no other Google policy reaches it either, we won't prepare an appeal on it. You get that answer free, with what we'd do instead, which is one public reply written the way you'd talk to a customer standing in front of you.

Google's wording, unedited

The threat clause first. The section's opening line and its other two clauses are in the rest of the extract.

Content that contains a specific threat of harm against individuals or defined groups of people that would make a reasonable person fear for their mental or physical safety or well being.

The rest of the extract

We don’t allow users to post content to harass other people or businesses, or encourage others to participate in harassment.
This includes:
Doxxing.
Content that results in unwanted sexualization or objectification of a person, including claims about a person’s sexual activities, sexual orientation, or gender identity.

Google, Maps user-generated content policy, Prohibited & restricted content, section Harassment

Google's policy text captured August 4, 2026. Section headings re-checked against the live page September 3, 2026.

Common questions

Will Google remove a review that threatens me?
Google decides, and nobody outside Google can tell you the answer before you file. What we can tell you is whether the words trip a clause Google names, and a specific threat of harm is one of the three it names here.
The review printed my home address. Is that harassment or personal information?
Either section can hold it, and the appeal names one. With a threat in the same review, both clauses sit in Harassment, so one appeal on Harassment can argue both. With no threat anywhere in the text, the personal information policy is usually the closer fit.
Can I report the reviewer's profile too?
Yes, from the Maps app on a phone. That's the only place Google documents it. Google says to report a profile only when it contributes content that breaks a policy, so it isn't a second shot at the review.

File it yourself

How do you report a Google review for harassment?

From your Business Profile, open Read reviews, hit Report next to the review, pick a reason, and send it. The status shows up in the Reviews Management Tool, and Google says evaluation typically takes several days. That's the only timeline Google publishes for a review report.

Open Read reviews
In your Business Profile, find the review
Select Report, pick a reason
The pick can limit what the appeal may argue
Send it, then wait
Typically several days, Google says.
Decision pending
If it stays up, the appeal
Report reviewed - no policy violation
One per review, ever. You file it.

The report, then the appeal. Drawn by us, not a screenshot of Google.

Picking the reason is the awkward part. Google documents two example reasons for that menu, Spam and Profanity, and doesn't publish the rest. You see the full list only when you open it. Pick the option closest to harassment, even when the review also insults you, because the threat or the address is what the report rests on, not the insult around it. People who do this pick the closest match on the report form and save the detail for the appeal. That's Stefan Somborac, in the Local Search Forum.

And there's a catch. If the report comes back with no policy violation found, Google gives you Google's one-time review appeal. One per review, ever. The appeal names a policy, and naming one that doesn't match your argument can waste the one appeal you have. On this policy the appeal names Harassment and points at the clause the review's own words trip, whether that's the threat, the private detail, the sexual claims about a person, or the call for others to join in. So the filing is the whole job. You file it from your own profile. We never submit anything to Google.

There's a second path, and it's easy to miss. You can also report the reviewer's profile, and Google documents that report only in the Maps app on a phone. You tap the user's name, then More, then Report, and Google's example reasons there are Legal issue and Privacy concerns. Google's separate article on profile reports adds the scope: report a profile only when it contributes content that breaks a policy.

Open the Maps app on a phone
The only place Google documents it.
Tap the user's name, then More, then Report
The reviewer's profile, not the review
Pick a reason
Google's example reasons there are Legal issue and Privacy concerns
Only a profile that breaks a policy
It isn't a second shot at the review.

The second path, the reviewer's profile. Drawn by us, not a screenshot of Google.

What evidence does a harassment report or appeal need?

Words, not attachments. The appeal is a free-text form with no upload field, so whatever you have, you write it out in the box.

Three things go in it.

Quote the threatening or identifying words from the review.
Name the section, Harassment.
Say which clause those words trip.

A threat argument and a doxxing argument are different arguments, so name the clause each set of words trips. Where the review names a person, say who that person is in relation to the business and whether the detail was public before the review printed it.

The strongest reviews to argue are the ones that say the violation out loud. An explicit threat is one of those.

The policeOne thing sits outside all of this. A specific threat against a person is a matter for the police, and reporting the review to Google isn't a substitute for that.

A demand attachedIf someone demands money or favors from you in exchange for taking the review down, that's a different channel. Google runs a separate merchant extortion report form for that shape, and our guide to review extortion walks through it.

Or have us analyze it

How do you check whether a review matches Google's harassment policy?

Put in the business name and we'll analyze every bad review on the profile against Google's written review policies, not this one alone. We read reviews at 2★ and below that carry at least ten characters of text, and you get a verdict on each one: strong grounds for removal, possible grounds, or no grounds. About six in ten profiles we analyze have no review with grounds for removal. We say so plainly, with a reply playbook attached. You'll find the count in what the analysis has produced so far, and how we decide whether a review has grounds covers how we measured it. Where there are grounds, how the free analysis works walks through what we prepare and what you file. Nothing is behind a call.

No email. No account. The answer is free either way.

Each review comes back with one of three:

Strong grounds for removalPossible grounds for removalNo grounds for removal

The shop owner sits at a table inside the shop after closing, reading her phone. Above the shop floats a row of six review cards: four with five gold stars, two one-star cards drawn in red.

Which other Google review policies could apply?

A review doing several things at once often has a stronger section than this one. When the attack turns on a protected characteristic, Google's hate speech policy is where Google's protected list actually lives, not here. When a review published details about a person and there's no threat anywhere in it, Google's personal information policy is usually the closer fit. When the language itself is the problem, Google's profanity policy covers it. The full set is every Google review policy category. Separately from the policy path, Google keeps a reporting channel called Legal Removals for content that breaks local law (support.google.com/contributionpolicy/answer/16426540).