A removal partner for PR agencies

Key facts for PR and communications agencies

A syndicated copy of a story is a separate publication with a separate publisher, which is why regional and aggregator versions sometimes resolve when the originating title will not move.

An article can stop appearing in search results for a client's name while the piece itself stays exactly where it is, which is frequently what the client actually wants.

GDPR Article 17 supports erasure over personal data about European residents and underpins the delisting route used across Europe and the United Kingdom.

IPSO in the United Kingdom handles accuracy and privacy complaints under the Editors Code against member publishers, and the Australian Press Council performs a similar function.

The UK Defamation Act 2013 requires serious harm, and serious financial loss for a company, so an unflattering accurate piece is a different problem from a false one.

In the United Kingdom in particular, an attempt to suppress accurate reporting is itself considered newsworthy, which is why assessment comes before anyone is contacted.

X, Meta, TikTok and YouTube each publish policies on harassment, impersonation and private information that reach posts no court would order removed.

Where removal starts and placement stops

You already know the moment. The statement has gone out, the relationships have been used, a right of reply has been offered and taken, and the piece is still the first result for the client's name. Everything left is legal, regulatory or technical rather than editorial, and it is decided by publishers, platforms and search engines rather than by anyone you can call. That is the layer we operate in, and it is deliberately not spin.

The second thing agencies bring us is the user generated layer, which does not respond to media relations at all. A coordinated pile on that starts on X, moves to screenshots on Instagram and Reddit, and then produces a story about the reaction rather than the original event. Attack blogs registered on the client's name. Review platform waves. None of that has an editor to call.

The third is speed. In a live crisis the first hours decide how far something travels, and the difference between acting at hour two and hour thirty is usually the difference between a contained problem and a permanent one.

What do press rules and the law actually allow?

Publishers are not obliged to remove lawful journalism, and no reputable mechanism forces them to. What exists instead are parallel systems, and the skill is knowing which one a given URL sits under. Editorial standards come first: a title's own corrections policy and, for member publishers, the Editors Code enforced by IPSO in the United Kingdom or the equivalent Press Council process in Australia. They cost nothing to use and are frequently more effective than a letter, because they are the process the publisher has already agreed to.

Data protection sits alongside it. In Europe and the United Kingdom, GDPR Article 17 supports delisting. That does not delete the article. It changes what a search for a person's name returns, which is often exactly what your client is asking for without having the words for it.

Defamation is the slowest and most expensive path and the one we recommend least often. A claim that is arguable is not the same as a claim worth bringing, and a failed one leaves a permanent record. Where litigation is right, that is your client's counsel's call and we support it rather than lead it. What none of these systems will do is remove accurate reporting on a matter of public interest, and we say that before anyone is contacted rather than after.

What we need from you to start

For the scan: the URLs, the client name and the search terms that matter. We map the syndication footprint, the aggregator copies, the user generated layer and the search picture, and we send it back in writing. It is free, and it is yours and your client's to keep.

To go live we need written authority from the client, or from you where you hold authority to instruct. For an accuracy point we need the documents that prove the specific error, which is usually a court record, a company filing, correspondence or a contract, not a general denial. For a privacy route we need confirmation of which details are personal and accurate. For images, the licence position and who holds the copyright. For a defamation assessment, the exact wording and dated captures.

We also need the full history of contact with the publication. Who spoke to the reporter, what was said, whether anything was agreed off the record, and whether a lawyer has already written. Every one of those changes what the next approach can be, and finding out afterwards is how good matters get damaged.

Timelines and what usually happens first

In a live crisis we respond the same day and start on the urgent items immediately. The written scan follows within a few business days for the fuller picture.

Beyond that, timelines depend on the route, the publisher and the platform, and they are set out in writing once the links are known. We do not promise outcomes or dates, and we will not let you brief a client that something is coming down. What you get is a straight assessment of which items look workable, so the expectation you set with your client is one you can keep.

Common mistakes that make this harder

A legal letter as the opening move against a national title. Without an evidenced accuracy point it hardens the position, and the letter itself can become a story.

The client contacting the journalist directly. Everything is on the record by default, and a defensive message becomes a follow up piece or a screenshot inside the original.

Publishing a long rebuttal on the client's own site. It creates a second indexable page carrying the accusation, ranks for the same query, and gives the story a new hook.

Paying an attack site operator. It confirms a payer, and the same content reappears under a new domain within weeks.

Letting the client delete their own posts, photographs or old profiles before anything is preserved. Those are frequently the evidence that shows the source of a claim. Preserve first.

Waiting out the news cycle. Syndicated and aggregated copies keep settling into search long after the coverage has stopped, and the copies are usually more workable than the original.

How we work behind your agency

You keep the client. We work behind you, report to you, and stay out of the room unless you want us in it. Many of our agency relationships never introduce us by name to the end client at all, and the reporting we send is formatted so you can forward it under your own brand. Our white label content removal page and partner program set out the two structures agencies use.

Where the client's counsel is engaged, we coordinate so that nothing we do compromises a legal claim, and we are happy to be instructed through the firm where privilege matters. Where there is an in house communications team, we agree who owns which URLs so nothing is worked twice or briefed as resolved while it is still open. Where a security team is involved, personal data removals usually serve both purposes and we share the same record.

We sign your NDA or provide ours, we never disclose client names, and anything we publish about our work is anonymized. Discretion is the product, not a feature of it.

Who makes first contact and what the 15-minute call covers

It is usually the account director or the agency principal, often during a live matter and often before the client has been told that outside help is being considered. That is fine. Nothing happens externally until you instruct it, and we do not contact your client.

The 15-minute call is a triage. You give us the URLs and the history, we tell you which items have a real route, which are opinion or accurate reporting that will stand, and what the risk of each approach is, including the risk of a second story. You come off the call able to give your client a defensible position rather than a hopeful one.

Fees are discussed on the call and set out in writing after the free Exposure Scan, once the links are known. Agencies that bring matters regularly usually move to a standing arrangement so a new crisis does not start with a procurement conversation. Our process page describes each stage, and our press practice page covers the placement side that sits alongside this work.