Skip to main content

What if your restaurant is threatened with a one-star Google review?

No matter how impeccable service a restaurant provides, chances are it will still receive negative online reviews from time to time. Recently, some top-rated restaurants in San Francisco and New York, including those with Michelin stars, began receiving a blitz of one-star ratings on Google with no description or photos (Morales, 2022). The owners believed those leaving one-star ratings had never dined in their establishments. Moreover, soon after the reviews, they all received emails from the reviewers who claimed the responsibility.  


What did the reviewers want by leaving one-star Google ratings? 


The reviewers asked the restaurants to pay them a $75 Google Play gift card before they would remove the ratings. If they did not receive the gift card, they would add more bad ratings to the business. 


How did the restaurants respond to those negative reviews? 


One owner tweeted about her experience to Google as a complaint. Google removed the one-star ratings for her. Another restaurant got those one-star reviews taken down after its customers outcried on social media. Not all restaurants are that lucky, however. Some had difficulty reaching out to Google or having Google remove the negative comments. The scammers also send follow-up emails:


“We can keep doing this indefinitely. Is $75 worth more to you than a loss to the business?”


What can be done with this kind of cybercrime? 


If targeted, I will not suggest any restaurants to even think about paying the $75 gift card as requested. Instead, they should immediately report the incident to Google, local police departments, or even the FBI and the Federal Trade Commission. It is critical to keep a photocopy of all reports being filed. Referring to my research studies about online reviews, I also recommend the following actions: 


  • Be open to its stakeholders about the incident on the restaurant’s website and on every social media outlet or through email marketing. 
  • Publish all updates about the incident through the same marketing communication channels (e.g., sharing the police report). 
  • Encourage satisfied and repeat customers to post positive reviews and let them be advocates for the business. 
  • Respond to all one-star reviews with facts. The restaurant may confront the reviewer if it looks like a fake review and asks for more details about the complaint. Suppose a real customer leaves a negative review. In that case, the restaurant should tell the public that they have taken specific actions to address the service failure issue.


Let’s hope we can find a solution to stop this kind of cybercrime soon. What suggestions will you make to address this issue?  




Morales, Christina (July 13, 2022). Restaurants face an extortion threat: Bad Google reviews. The New York Times. Available via

The picture was downloaded from Adriot.In.

This viewpoint was first published in the Hospitality News Magazine


Popular posts from this blog

Luxury vs. Millennials and Their Technology: The Ritz-Carlton (By Julia Shorr)

Embodying the finest luxury experience, The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, LLC has been established since 1983. In 1998, Marriott International purchased the brand offering it more opportunity for growth while being independently owned and operated. They are known for their enhanced service level as the motto states, “Ladies and Gentlemen serving Ladies and Gentlemen”. The luxury brand now carries 97 hotels and resorts internationally and is attempting to keep the aspects of luxury while keeping up with the trends of the technologically improving generations. The Varying Demographics of the Target Market The Ritz-Carlton’s typical target market includes: business executives, corporate, leisure travelers, typically middle-aged persons and elders, and families from the upper and upper-middle class section of society .   This infers a large range of types of travelers in which all are similar in that they are not opposed to spending extra for the luxurious ambiance. However, with

The challenges of SB 93 (California Senate Bill No. 93) will impose on the employers and their human resource management team (by Brittany Schaffer)

The COVID-19 pandemic started in early 2020, and it has caused massive changes within a short period of time. One of the most rememberable effects of the COVID-19 pandemic was that businesses had to come to a complete halt, forcing them to lay off employees. California's unemployment rates went up.  Now that the stay-at-home orders have lifted, people start to come out. Businesses are now reopening, looking to rehire their laid-off employees. Before the pandemic, employers had the option of recalling only a certain number of laid-off employees they would want to rehire based on employees' job performance. That option had been changed after Governor Gavin Newsome signed into law - Senate Bill 93, which went into effect on April 16th, 2021. The California Senate Bill No. 93 (SB 93) According to SB 93, companies in specific industries, mainly the hospitality industry, have the obligation to provide job opportunities in written form to qualified employees being laid off due to COVI

The complicated situation of tattoos in the workplace (by Harry Law)

Tattoos are a form of expression that convey the individuality of their owners. They can represent a multitude of things, like a tie to a family member, a favorite quote with a special meaning, or even a favorite cartoon character. Tattoos also can carry great cultural and/or religious significance. Every tattoo is unique and says something about the individual person who wears it. The problem that many companies face is when a tattoo is considered appropriate and when it should be covered.  Employees are after all the faces of a company, so the tattoos on their bodies are connected to and represent that company as well. Some workplaces have instituted rules and regulations when it comes to their employees’ tattoos, but there can be negative consequences when a company goes too far in telling their employees what they can and cannot do with their own bodies. The Disney Company has recently changed its policy on tattoos. Disney’s goal is to create a magical, fantasy experience for their