Source record
Google review filtering, reviewer location, and sudden review-volume spikes.
Hey, Google. My daughter was spared by a guardrail down here, and we planted like 10,000 daffodil bulbs here, and somebody had added a pin here as a historic marker for Hannah's daffodils. And it got like a hundred plus reviews, and like more than half of those have just disappeared today.
This is one of the problems with AI automation. He lost all of his reviews because Google's AI is actually doing what it was designed to do. Google tracks your location.
And since none of the reviewers were actually at the location and they're coming from all over the world, Google filtered them out.
Also, they only had 8 reviews. Then he posted this video, and they got a spike of 100 new reviews overnight. That looks suspicious to Google, and that's another red flag that might get your reviews filtered.
And it's a shame. It's just that AI lacks the human empathy to be able to handle a situation like this. But humanity wins.
7 million views, and Hannah's Daffodils has over 14 Google reviews and growing.
The creator attributes review filtering to reviewers lacking location proximity and to an abrupt spike in review volume that appeared suspicious to Google.
This may be interpreted as monitoring review-acquisition patterns for geographic inconsistency and unnatural velocity instead of encouraging concentrated bursts from unrelated audiences.
Hey, Google. My daughter was spared by a guardrail down here, and we planted like 10,000 daffodil bulbs here, and somebody had added a pin here as a historic marker for Hannah's daffodils. And it got like a hundred plus reviews, and like more than half of those have just disappeared today. This is one of the problems with AI automation...
Base2026 attributes this public source record to @darrenshawseo, published 2026-07-17, with the original platform link and correction/removal path kept on the page.