It is not lying.
It is quoting.
A panel with the wrong job title, an old company or a description you have outgrown feels like an error by Google. It usually is not. It is Google accurately reporting what the web still says about you.
Which is oddly good news, because it means the fix is available to you. It is just not the fix most people try first.
Correcting a fact, properly
Search the wrong fact itself, not your name
You are looking for every page that states it. One of them is the origin.
Ask the origin to correct it
A short, specific, polite request naming the exact line. This is the step that does the work.
Fix everything you own the same day
Site, profiles, author boxes, speaker bios. Consistency across what you control is free.
Chase the significant copies
You will not get them all. You need enough to tip the balance, not perfection.
Claim the panel yourself, then suggest the change once
In your own account, with your own documents. Never delegate it, and do not resubmit repeatedly.
Re-check in a month, signed out
A private window, no personalisation, so you are seeing what other people see.
Why it is out of date
Panels are built from consensus, and consensus lags. Your title changed eighteen months ago; the conference page, the old author box and three syndicated articles did not.
Google is counting sources, not recency alone. Until the new fact appears in more of the places it trusts than the old one, the old one keeps winning.
This is also why a single announcement rarely shifts anything. One new page against a dozen old ones is not a change of consensus.
What can be corrected and what cannot
Facts that are checkable elsewhere can be corrected, and usually are: a name spelling, a role that has genuinely changed, an institution, a date that appears correctly in an authoritative source.
Things that cannot: accurate information you would rather hide, a description you find unflattering but which reflects what sources say, and anything with no source at all. A request to add an unsourced claim is a request to be trusted, and that is not on offer.
The description line is the hardest single element to move, because it is written from the broadest possible reading of what you are.
The order that works
Find the origin of the wrong fact rather than the copies. One page usually started it and the rest repeated it. Correcting the copies while the origin stands achieves very little.
Get the origin corrected, then everything you control on the same day, then the second-hand copies where anyone will take the request.
Only then claim the panel and suggest the change. Now the suggestion agrees with the web instead of arguing with it, which is the only argument that works.
How long to allow
Weeks for a well-sourced correction, months for a description, and sometimes never for something the web has settled on.
There is no confirmation and no appeal. You will not be told the suggestion was accepted; the panel simply changes, or it does not.
Questions
Can I get the description changed?
Sometimes, and it is the hardest element. It is written from a broad reading of what you are, so it moves only when that broad reading moves.
It shows a different person entirely.
That is a name collision rather than a wrong fact, and it is a bigger job. The work becomes making your record the one Google prefers for that name.
Can I remove the panel instead?
Not on request. Accurate panels are not removed because the subject dislikes them.
Do I need to claim it before correcting?
You can suggest without claiming and it carries less weight. Claiming is free, so do it first.
If you would rather it was handled
Three thousand dollars flat, half at the start and half only when there is something live to show you. Six to twelve months is the honest window, and about a third of the people who ask are told not to proceed.