My Google Reviews Are Not Showing Up — Four Out Of Five Never Posted
Written by Eva Taub. Everything below is from my own Google Business Profile account, with dates.
What happened
Between 17 and 20 September 2026, five of my clients left reviews on my Google Business Profile for Newnan Black Skin Laser Hair Removal.
One appeared. Four never posted.
I was not notified. Nothing is sitting marked as pending. Google has never told me which review was refused, or why.
Of the four that never posted, three were from Black clients. The fourth was from a Spanish-speaking client.
Why there are only fifteen reviews on that profile
If you go and look at my Google profile you will count about fifteen reviews, and you will reasonably wonder how somebody with forty-plus years behind her has so few. It is a fair question and I would rather answer it than have you wonder.
Because that is not my original listing.
About eight months ago my Newnan listing was taken down. Every review on it went with it. Years of women who had taken the trouble to sit down and write about what happened to their skin, wiped off in one go.
To trade at all I had to start over from nothing. A new business name. A new email address. New verification and new identity documents. Everything you can see on that profile today has been built from zero since then, by women who found me in the last few months.
So when four reviews out of five disappear in four days, understand what is actually happening. It is not a rounding error on a big established profile. It is happening to a profile that is already the second one, already a rebuild, already starting from nothing once.
In my opinion this is not bad luck and it is not a run of coincidences. It is systematic, and it has been aimed at me for years.
It is not the language
There is a Spanish review on that same profile from nine months ago. It is live right now. Google translated it itself and shows “Translated by Google — See original (Spanish)” underneath it.
So Spanish reviews do publish on this profile. One did. The one from last week did not.
The same post, with and without a photograph of Black skin
On 19 September I ran a test on that same profile. I wrote one post. I submitted it twice. Once with no photograph. Once with a photograph of a Black client’s neck attached. The words were identical both times.
The post with no photograph published in twenty-four seconds. The post with the photograph of Black skin was rejected.
That is not a screenshot from somewhere else. That is my account, my post, my client’s neck.
It happened again the same night
Late that same night, 19 September, I posted four more updates to the same profile. Three published. One was refused.
The one that was refused is the one headed “South Fulton — were you told your skin is too dark to treat?” The photograph on it is my own client, lying on my treatment table with her eye shields on, while I work on her face.
I want to be straight about what that screenshot shows, because I would rather you trusted me than agreed with me.
The three posts underneath the refused one all went up fine, and two of them also have Black clients in the photograph. So it is not as simple as Google refusing every picture of a Black woman. It does not.
Look at which two were refused. A close photograph of a Black client’s neck during treatment. A photograph of a Black client on the table mid-treatment. Both refused. What goes through is a portrait. What comes back refused is dark skin, close up, with my hands on it.
That is the actual pattern in my account, and it is worse than the simple version, not better. The pictures being thrown out are the ones that show the work. They are the only pictures that prove a woman with Fitzpatrick V or VI skin can be treated safely at all.
The same post, three times, one hour apart
The next day, 20 September, I ran the South Fulton post again as a proper test. One piece of writing. Three submissions in total. The words never changed once. The only thing I changed was the photograph.
- With a photograph of a Black client on my treatment table. Refused.
- With no photograph at all. Published.
- With a photograph of a light-skinned client on the same treatment table, same position, same eye shields, same room. Published in two minutes.
Read that screenshot again slowly, because it is the whole argument on one screen.
Identical words. Identical page. Identical room, table and treatment. Two women lying in the same position with the same shields over their eyes.
One of them is Black, and her photograph is the only one Google would not allow.
There is no wording problem here. There is no policy problem in the text, because the text published twice. There is nothing left in the experiment that is different except the colour of the woman’s skin.
I am a white woman. Google publishes pictures of my white clients on my profile in under two minutes. It refuses the Black ones. I did not go looking for this. I ran a post, it came back refused, and I checked.
That is now two refusals in two days — the Griffin neck and South Fulton, both on 19 September — every single one of them a photograph of Black skin being treated, and every version without Black skin in it sailing through.
If this is not discrimination, tell me what it is. I have left space on this page to print the answer.
Google told me why. It said my client was sexually explicit.
At 11:09 on the night of 19 September, Google emailed me about the South Fulton post. This is what it said, word for word:
“Newnan Black Skin Laser Hair Removal, your post violates Google’s content policy. Content that violates our policy on sexually explicit content isn’t allowed. Sexually explicit content includes genital nudity or depictions or descriptions of sexual acts.”
Google Business Profile, email to me, 19 September 2026. Routing ID DPNB.
The photograph was a fully clothed Black woman lying on a treatment table with protective shields over her eyes while I worked on her face.
Google’s system looked at that and classified it as genital nudity or a sexual act.
Then I posted the same words with a photograph of a light-skinned client, fully clothed, lying on the same table in the same position with the same shields over her eyes. That one published in two minutes. Nobody emailed me about her.
I have been doing this work for over forty years and I do not have words for what it is like to read that email. A Black woman came to me for help with her skin. She let me photograph her. And a machine at Google decided that a picture of her lying on my table, clothed, being treated, was pornography.
A white woman in the identical picture is a medical photograph. A Black woman is sexually explicit.
That is not a wording problem. That is not a policy I have misread. That is a sentence Google wrote to me in an email, and it has a routing ID on it.
This is not the first time. It is the first time I wrote it down.
I want to be honest with you about how long this has been going on, and equally honest about what I can and cannot prove.
This has been happening to me for years. Posts refused. Posts taken down after they were already live. Photographs of my Black clients disappearing while everything else stayed up. I would repost the same thing without the picture and it would go straight through, and I would shrug and get on with my day, because I had clients waiting and a business to run.
I never kept the screenshots. Not one. It never occurred to me that I would need them, and honestly I did not think anyone would care. I just kept fighting it the way you fight weather. Post, refused, repost, refused, take the picture off, up it goes. Year after year.
So let me say plainly what that means. I cannot prove the years. I have no evidence of them and I am not going to pretend I do. All I have of those years is my own word.
What I can prove is 19 and 20 September 2026, because this time I stopped and documented it. The screenshots on this page, the controlled test, and the email from Google are four days out of many years, and they are the four days I happened to write down.
If I had known to keep records, this page would be a great deal longer. I am keeping them now.
They took a channel with 73 million views and never told me why
I built a YouTube channel over twelve years. It reached more than 73 million views. Around ninety per cent of the people watching it, writing to me and asking me questions were Black women, and they were not only in Georgia or in America. They wrote to me from everywhere.
I gave all of it away free, and most of what I taught was not about machines at all. It was about hormones, because that is where almost all of this actually starts.
How the hormones work, and what happens when they stop working properly. What androgens do to a hair follicle, and why a soft invisible hair on your chin turns into a coarse dark one that comes back in two days. Why PCOS puts hair on the jaw and the neck. What the thyroid does. What happens in perimenopause and menopause, and why the hair changes character at the exact time a woman least expects it. Why an eighteen-year-old and a fifty-year-old can have the same hair on the same chin for two completely different reasons, and why treating them the same way fails one of them.
And the discoloration, which is the half nobody explains to Black women. Why melasma sits across the cheeks and the upper lip and is driven by hormones, not by dirt and not by being unclean. Why post-inflammatory hyperpigmentation happens — why melanin-rich skin answers every injury, every wax, every burn, every picked ingrown, by laying down pigment. Why the marks are not the hair and will not leave when the hair leaves. Why bleaching creams so often make it worse, and why the hormonal cause has to be understood or you are treating a stain and ignoring the tap.
And yes, the practical things too. How to tell a laser from an IPL. Why a burn on dark skin heals dark. Why white and grey hairs will never respond to any laser at any setting. Which settings are safe on Fitzpatrick V and VI and which ones will mark you. Things a woman needs to know before she hands over her face and her money to a clinic that does not know her skin.
That is what was on that channel. Not advertising. Not selling. Explaining to women how their own bodies work, so that nobody could lie to them about it.
About four years ago YouTube terminated it. No explanation was given, then or since. Twelve years of work and an audience I had spent those twelve years earning, gone in a morning, and not one sentence from anybody telling me what I had done wrong.
I asked. Other people asked on my behalf. Google never answered any of us. Not a refusal, not a reason, not a sentence.
Nobody can go and check that channel now. It was removed from the face of the earth and I have nothing left of it but my word, so I am telling you plainly that this part is my word.
What I did not understand four years ago, I understand this week. Google’s systems look at a photograph of a clothed Black woman on my treatment table and classify it as sexually explicit content. They put that in writing to me on 19 September. My channel was twelve years of exactly that — skin, treatment, bodies, close up, and mostly Black. I cannot prove that is what killed it. Nobody at Google will tell me what killed it. But I have now watched that same system make that exact mistake on my account, in writing, with a routing ID on it.
What I think is happening, in my own words
I know why that channel went, and I want other people to know why as well.
You treat Black people. You educate Black people. You need to be eliminated.
Why? Because knowledge is power. Once a woman has that knowledge she has power, and once she has power she can decide for herself. She does not need anybody deciding for her. She walks into a clinic and she knows what an IPL is and she knows what a 1064 is and she cannot be sold the wrong one. She knows the burn on her face was not her skin being difficult. Nobody can tell her anything.
In my opinion this is pure control and pure oppression. It is no different from living under a communist regime.
I did live under one. I know exactly what it smells like, and I can smell it from a million miles away.
That paragraph is my opinion and I am not going to dress it up as anything else. Everything above it on this page is documented, dated, and sitting in screenshots and in an email from Google. You can take the evidence and leave my opinion, and the evidence does not change.
Twenty months of “In Progress”
People keep telling me to contact Google support about this. I want to show you what contacting Google support looks like.
That case has never been answered. It is not that anyone refused me. It is that nothing happens at all.
This is not me guessing. Google has said it themselves.
I am not making an accusation Google has never heard before. Google has published this about its own systems.
On 11 May 2022, on Google’s own official blog, announcing the Monk Skin Tone Scale, Google wrote:
“When not built and tested intentionally to include a broad range of skin-tones, computer vision systems have been found to not perform as well for people with darker skin.”
Google, “Improving skin tone representation across Google”, 11 May 2022
That is Google. Not me. Google, in writing, saying its image systems do not work as well on dark skin.
In 2015 Google Photos labelled a photograph of a Black couple as gorillas. Google apologised. Eight years later, in 2023, reporters tested it again and found Google had not fixed it — it had simply removed the word so the system could not say it out loud. The system still could not tell the difference. They took away the label, not the problem.
So when I show you a photograph of a Black woman’s neck being rejected by Google and the identical post with no photograph being published in twenty-four seconds, I am not inventing a theory. I am showing you the exact thing Google already admitted its systems do.
And they do block people. They have said that too.
People tell me Google would never suppress anyone. Google has already said, in writing, to the United States Congress, that governments pressured it over what stayed up and what came down.
In September 2025, Alphabet — Google and YouTube’s parent company — wrote to the Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee and said:
“It is unacceptable and wrong when any government, including the Biden administration, attempts to dictate how the Company moderates content.”
Alphabet, letter to the House Judiciary Committee, September 2025
In the same letter Alphabet said it would let creators it had banned apply to come back. Those were real people with real channels who were removed, and Google has now conceded they should not have been.
And here is the part I want people to sit with. In January 2021 the social media companies blocked a sitting President of the United States. YouTube, which is Google, suspended his channel. If social media can block and blacklist a President of the United States, then for sure they are so powerful that they can block anyone. They can certainly block four Black women in Georgia who tried to write about their own skin.
Nobody is coming to defend those four women. That is why I am writing this myself.
My questions to Google
I am asking these publicly because I have not been able to ask them any other way.
- Which of my four reviews was refused, and what was the specific reason for each one?
- Why did a Spanish review from nine months ago publish and get translated by Google, while a Spanish review from last week did not appear at all?
- Why was the identical post rejected with a photograph of Black skin attached and published without it?
- Why were the only two posts refused in two days the only two showing a Black client mid-treatment, while portraits of Black clients posted the same hour went through?
- On what basis did your system classify a clothed Black woman being treated on a medical table as sexually explicit content — genital nudity or a sexual act — while the identical photograph of a light-skinned woman on the same table published in two minutes?
- Why is a client told her review was submitted when it is never shown to anyone?
- If this is not discrimination, what is it? I am asking honestly. Tell me the other explanation and I will publish it on this page, word for word.
My conclusion
I have spent forty-plus years working on Black and melanin-rich skin. I know what my clients look like and I know what they wrote.
My conclusion is that this is one hundred per cent biased against a population that is Black and dark-skinned. Not one person at Google decided it. It does not need a person. A system built and tested on light skin will read dark skin as a problem, and that is what I am watching happen to my clients’ words and my clients’ photographs.
I am not writing this because I lost five reviews. I am writing it because four women took the time to say something true about their own skin and Google made their words disappear without telling any of us.
If this has happened to you
If your clients leave Google reviews that never appear, or your posts are rejected with a photograph attached and published without it, I would like to hear from you. I am keeping a record of it with dates and screenshots.
If you are a client of mine and you left a review that you cannot find, it is not your fault and you did nothing wrong. It was not deleted by me and I never saw it.
Who I am
Eva Taub — forty-plus years of laser, electrolysis and pigmentation work on Black and melanin-rich skin.
Newnan Black Skin Laser Hair Removal, 42 Masters Court, Newnan, GA 30265. By appointment only, and every treatment is done by me.
Ring me and describe what is happening. I will tell you honestly whether I can help, including if the answer is no. There is no charge for the conversation.
305-864-3333 · Request a consultation
Black women with unwanted facial hair — every town in west Georgia