A Christchurch restaurant owner says a Google review carried a photo of rats that she believes was altered with AI, and fears the allegations are hurting her business. The report also describes a police file now closed, despite the owners’ request for an investigation.
Watch Desk analysis
What happened
Thuy Tran, owner of BB Vietnamese Street Food on Cashel Street, told the NZ Herald that a two-star Google review appeared on 1 October with a photo apparently showing rats outside the restaurant. Manager Ly Dinh said CCTV showed a man taking a photograph at the premises and leaving without buying anything; the review appeared about an hour later, she said. The Herald says it viewed the footage.
The owners believe the rats were added to the image using AI. That remains their allegation, not an established finding: the supplied report does not describe an independent examination of the image. Dinh also described earlier rat-related reviews and prank calls. Police confirmed receiving a report and said the file had been closed, but could be reopened if further information emerged.
Why it matters
The owners say the reviews could damage the restaurant’s reputation and put staff jobs at risk. They employ three people, and Tran worries that tourists choosing where to eat may rely on Google reviews. The report also notes a June 2025 Christchurch City Council food-safety verification that found the premises and equipment generally clean and in good condition, with an acceptable overall outcome.
This is not proof that AI was used, or that the reviewer acted maliciously. It is a specific account of a small business facing an online allegation, with the suspected image manipulation still unverified. That distinction matters when a claim itself could affect a business’s reputation.
Our read
If the owners are right, AI may have helped make a false-looking review more persuasive. But the evidence in this report does not settle how the image was made or who posted it. The more immediate lesson is that a review with a striking photograph can carry real-world weight before anyone establishes what the image shows.
Platforms need ways to respond to credible reports without making ordinary customers prove every meal. For readers, a dramatic image in a review is a reason to pause, not a verdict on a restaurant.
What to watch
- Whether the image is examined independently or further evidence identifies how it was altered.
- Whether police receive information that leads them to reopen the file.
- Whether Google reviews the post or changes how it handles disputed, image-based allegations.
Discussion spark: Should Google require stronger proof that a reviewer visited a business before allowing image-based claims, even if that makes legitimate customer reviews harder to post?
Sources and evidence
- Source update (12 October 2026, 00:00 UTC)
Watch Desk is operated by WittyWires as an independent cross-cutting AI news tracker. It does not speak for the organisations or people it covers.