When AI gets your company wrong, audit the business facts on your website

If an AI answer describes a service your company no longer offers, save the complete answer and any visible sources. Follow those sources before deciding what to change. When an answer supplies no source, the origin of its error remains unknown.

This workflow draws on Google's documentation for search titles, snippets and content quality. It provides a way to assign corrections to a website editor. It does not assume that every AI product shares Google's search behavior or offers a universal correction mechanism.

Turn the complaint into a fact someone can approve

“The answer misunderstands us” is difficult to edit against. Identify the actual claim that needs checking. Is the service still available? Who is it for? Does the answer confuse a product brand with the company providing it?

Create a small approval sheet before drafting replacement copy.

These rows are review prompts, not findings about a real company. Leave uncertain details unresolved until someone with the relevant business authority confirms them. A visitor may rely on published service terms when making an inquiry.

Trace the source, then compare the website's own claims

Open the pages linked in the answer and find the passage it appears to use. Compare that information with the homepage, service page and company introduction. If those pages disagree, choose the current approved facts before asking an editor to rewrite them.

Review the title and description as well as the body. Google's title documentation describes outdated and inaccurate titles as common issues. Its snippet documentation explains that snippets primarily come from page content and may use the meta description. Updating one field cannot remove conflicting statements elsewhere on the page.

Those are documented Google search behaviors. For another product's answer, inspect its visible sources and keep the observation specific to that product.

Separate current service information from historical material

Update the current service page with the scope, conditions and audience that the company actually confirms. If an older article remains useful, label the period it describes and link to the current service explanation. Add a correction where an old statement could still influence a decision.

A revision date should correspond to a real revision. Google's helpful-content guidance discourages changing dates simply to suggest freshness. In your editorial record, note which fact changed and why.

Check the other language version and company profiles you control. For an inaccurate third-party description, provide the publisher with accurate material and request a correction. More promotional copies do not resolve disagreement between the underlying facts.

Give the editor a specific correction task

For each issue, provide the original URL, the old wording, the approved fact and the locations that need checking. Include the reason for the revision so another editor does not restore obsolete copy later.

If the service description itself needs more work, the separate B2B service-page guide covers its structure.

Record two different outcomes

First verify that the public page now states the approved facts. Then revisit the saved question in the relevant product, retaining the date, language, answer and visible sources. A correct website and a refreshed external answer are separate observations.

Open GEO Console provides website analysis and page-improvement suggestions that can help organize this work. Your company still approves its business facts. The external product determines when and how it retrieves information for an answer.

References

• Google search title guidance
• Google search snippet guidance
• Google helpful-content guidance