Is it still gating if I only ask a soft question like "would you recommend us?"

Yes, if the answer determines what the customer sees next. The specific wording doesn't matter — what matters is whether a customer's response changes whether they're shown the public review link at all.

Can I have a private feedback form alongside my review requests?

Yes — as long as it's genuinely optional and available to every customer, not a gate that decides who gets routed to Google. The problem is routing based on sentiment, not the existence of another feedback channel.

What actually happens if Google decides a business has been gating reviews?

Google can remove reviews it attributes to a gated collection process and take further action against the profile. The exact response varies by case, so the safer approach is simply not to build a gated flow in the first place.

Reputation

What Is Review Gating? Why Google and the ACCC Both Prohibit It

Filtering happy customers toward Google and unhappy ones toward a private form feels like common sense — but it's against Google's rules, and it can expose you to real Australian Consumer Law risk. Here's what review gating actually is, and what to do instead.

Updated 25 July 2026 · 6 min read

What review gating actually is

Review gating is the practice of asking customers how their experience went before sending them toward a public review, and then only directing the ones who respond positively on to Google. Customers who indicate a poor experience get quietly routed to a private feedback form instead, so their comments never reach the public profile.

It usually looks like a simple satisfaction question — a star tap, a thumbs up/down, or "how would you rate your visit?" — placed in front of the actual review link. The question itself isn't the problem; using the answer to decide who gets shown the Google link and who gets shown something else is.

Cedric's own review-request emails are built to avoid this by design: every recipient gets the same link straight to your Google review form, with no rating gate in front of it. Negative feedback is handled through your inbox and escalation workflow after the fact, not by diverting unhappy customers away from Google before they get there.

Why Google prohibits it

Google's review policies require that businesses not selectively solicit reviews from customers, and gating is the clearest form of that: it manufactures a rating that reflects only the customers you chose to forward, not everyone who actually walked through the door.

Google can act on profiles it identifies as gating reviews, including removing the affected reviews from the listing. Because the practice is usually implemented through a third-party feedback tool or kiosk rather than anything visible on the profile itself, it's worth actually checking how your current review-request process works rather than assuming it's fine.

The Australian Consumer Law angle

Beyond Google's own rules, gating raises a genuine Australian Consumer Law question. A star rating built by filtering out negative respondents isn't an accurate representation of overall customer sentiment — and the ACCC has been explicit that it treats manipulated or selectively curated online reviews as a form of misleading conduct, in the same family as fake reviews and incentivised reviews.

The risk isn't hypothetical marketing theory — it's the same underlying concern as any other misleading representation about your business: customers are entitled to see a rating that reflects reality, not one that's been pre-filtered in your favour.

What a compliant review request looks like

The fix is straightforward: ask every customer the same way, send every customer to the same review link, and don't insert a sentiment question in front of it. If someone had a bad experience, you still want to know — just through your own channels, not by quietly keeping it off Google.

One consistent request, sent to every eligible customer — not a subset chosen by how happy you expect them to be.
No "how did we do?" question that determines which link the customer sees next.
A genuinely separate, always-available way to reach you directly (a phone number, a support email) that exists alongside the review ask, not instead of it for anyone.
Negative reviews that do land on Google get a thoughtful public reply, rather than a scramble to have them removed.

Review gating vs legitimate service recovery

It helps to be precise about what isn't gating. Having a customer service line, a complaints email, or a "get in touch" button on your website is completely normal and encouraged — the problem is only when that channel exists specifically to intercept unhappy customers before they reach the review platform, in place of showing them the same review link everyone else gets.

Responding well to a negative review that does land on Google is the opposite of a compliance problem — it's exactly the kind of visible accountability that reassures the next customer reading it.

A quick self-check

Does your review-request flow ask a satisfaction question before showing the review link?
Does the answer to that question change which link or form the customer sees next?
Would a customer who had a bad experience ever be shown a different destination to one who had a great one?
If you outsource review requests to a third-party kiosk, app, or agency, have you actually checked how it routes responses — rather than assumed it's compliant?