How can I filter reviews that use profanity while using schema markup?

[brettmandoes]

Google released new guidelines last year governing how schema markup is to be deployed on a website. One of those guidelines states that reviews on your site must not be filtered or altered to receive the benefit of schema markup. After my client was slapped on the wrist by Google for ignoring their Webmaster guidelines (and our advice ahem) they removed all filtering from the websites.

However, being a family friendly company it is a requirement that no profanity be displayed on the website. Google's guidelines are not entirely clear about what to do. They state:

"Profanity and vulgar language are discouraged. Reviews should be appropriate for a broad and diverse audience. Consequently, reviews containing vulgar or profane language may be ineligible for use."

and...

"Critic reviews must allow for customers to express both positive and negative sentiments. They may not be vetted by the business or restricted by the content provider based on the positive/negative sentiment of the review before submission to Google."

The issue is that we need to vet the reviews to remove profanity, yet that may be triggering for Google. Any thoughts?
Source: https://developers.google.com/search/docs/data-types/reviews

[MiriamEllis]

Wow, I would love to see John Mu address this. You've brought up a really good topic Brett, for which I don't have an answer. Can anyone in our community help Brett out?

Before coming to Moz, I worked at a forum where any profanity was autocorrected by the platform. I'm not sure how that worked technically, but the issue you've raised is that Google is specifically stating that they don't want website-based reviews to be altered, while at the same time they want to safeguard their own review base from being degraded with profanity. It's a mixed signal, for sure. Google can choose to filter out a vulgar review on their own platform (or any review they feel doesn't meet their quality guidelines), but they apparently don't want you to have the same ability on your own site. This is definitely a conundrum and one I'd love to see a Google staffer address.

[brettmandoes]

Thanks Miriam, I've posted the question in Google's product support forums as well to try and find a resolution. If anyone nibbles I'll update the Q&A here as well.

There is a caveat in the wording that I've noticed where it states "Critic reviews must allow for customers to express both positive and negative sentiments. They may not be vetted by the business or restricted by the content provider based on the positive/negative sentiment of the review before submission to Google."

This may give us wiggle room to vet the review based on profanity, though I don't know how Google would be able to make the distinction since any review using profanity is more likely by its nature to have a lower rating, and therefore is likely to trip Google's alarms.

[MiriamEllis]

I'm glad you decided to post to Google, Brett. This is the first time I've ever seen this issue you've raised, and I'm very impressed that you've voiced it. It really does deserve and answer from Google, and I'd love it if you could let our community know if you hear from a staffer or volunteer there. Thanks!

[brettmandoes]

I received a response from Barry Hunter who said pretty much what I suspected: that the devil is in the details.

"Critic reviews must allow for customers to express both positive and negative sentiments. They may not be vetted by the business or restricted by the content provider based on the positive/negative sentiment of the review before submission to Google."

I've bolded the distinction he had made which is that it's acceptable to vet reviews as a profanity filter.

What he did not address, though he did acknowledge, was that there may still exist some confusion as the reviews most laden with profanity are likely to be angry, negative reviews. While I'm not 100% satisfied with this answer, I think it's likely to be the only one I'll get.

For those interested in the discussion: https://productforums.google.com/forum/#!msg/webmasters/k24p4fPf404/3e7D7hjxEwAJ

I'm tempted to <nofollow>that link until I get a satisfactory response  </nofollow>

[MiriamEllis]

Hey Brett!

Thanks so much for updating this thread. I like the answer you received, but I wish very much that it was coming directly from a Google staffer. I don't in any way doubt that what the volunteer is saying is true ... I'd just have preferred it if he mentioned he took the issue to staff to get an official answer. Hmm ... this is not an easy one!