Google wants to rank websites based on facts not links

THE internet is stuffed with garbage. Anti-vaccination websites make the front page of Google, and fact-free “news” stories spread like wildfire. Google has devised a fix – rank websites according to their truthfulness.

Google’s search engine currently uses the number of incoming links to a web page as a proxy for quality, determining where it appears in search results. So pages that many other sites link to are ranked higher. This system has brought us the search engine as we know it today, but the downside is that websites full of misinformation can rise up the rankings, if enough people link to them.


Whose facts?  h/t Xavier

 

Share
  • BillyHW

    I can’t possibly fathom any circumstances where this could lead to undesirable results.

    • No, it seems pretty airtight, doesn’t it?

    • Clausewitz

      One man’s facts are another man’s propaganda.

      • BillyHW

        Oh pish-posh, there is no way this power could be used for evil.

        • Clausewitz

          You forgot the winkie. ; )

  • ontario john

    I blame the Jews, and of course Harper.

  • DMB

    I wonder how they would rank porn sites? Having said that I would like to know how they would rank websites debunking man made global warming? Individuals such as Michael Mann, Al Gore provide all kinds of misinformation on man made global warming yet many in the elite still try to push this as “scientific information”.

    • Xavier

      I think that’s the point. The sites won’t be banned but would wither from reduced traffic and therefore less ad revenue – which of course is controlled by… Google!

  • Xavier

    I’m concerned about sites that are high visibility targets like http://pamelageller.com/ and http://wattsupwiththat.com/ but anyone running a blog or news site that doesn’t conform to the left’s groupthink could be punished – and since it’s Google, it’s global. Essentially they’ll be enforcing a U.S. progressive’s outlook on the entire Google-using world. As a result of the new FCC regulations, we’re probably going to see some new hate speech rules that will allow the DHS greater powers to shutter sites, and this new algorithm (if it even exists) could be used to starve out sites that the DHS finds problematic to shut down by reducing traffic and ad revenue. This approach is classic Obama – behind the scenes warfare that leaves the administration’s hands clean.

  • J. C.

    So if I Google the term ‘colossal doofus’, the first result will be Justin Trudeau???

  • WalterBannon

    Google and its new FCC toy “Net Neutering”, courtesy of Obama, will be the end of the internet as a free speech zone

    • There’s always the Dark Web

      • Drunk_by_Noon

        Until it’s made illegal.
        Heck, you might even have to hack your own router, and bounce off a proxy just to get there.
        Ofcourse they will have a truth chip that will have serious penalties for bypassing it.

      • Xavier

        Have you used anything like FreeNet or others?

        • Exile1981

          I used to have a blog that was only available if you knew the IP address. Does anyone know the IP for BCF? That way if the DNS server is blocked we could still access the site.

          • Xavier

            Switch to OpenDNS. DNSCrypt is an encryption addon that’s good too.

          • Exile1981

            ???? how

      • Exile1981

        So how do you access BCF without using a dns server?

        • Xavier

          Ask BCF what port is open.
          198.50.203.228:xx

          • Drunk_by_Noon

            Were that to happen we would see the rise of the “Internet speakeasy”.

  • Brett_McS

    So each site with have a ‘truthiness’ index? Sounds like a lot of manual work. The linkage ranking system is fully automatic.

    • Xavier

      They claim it’s going to be automatic and algorithm based. The description seems similar to the Olympic scoring system – points are deducted for incorrect facts rather than added up for correct facts. If that’s the case, sites that don’t deal in facts or opinion (say like Amazon or Pron) won’t be penalized for a lack of truthiness.

      The question though is whose facts will they use as the baseline?

      • Frau Katze

        And we know the Olympics scoring was perfect. No corruption, no paid off judges. Nothing like that at all.

        • Clausewitz

          Yeah, just ask Elizabeth Manley.

  • Drunk_by_Noon

    Because Google knows best?
    This would be a better idea if I trusted any tech company, especially not those that are run by leftists.
    Maybe it will segregate the web like TV?
    There are conservative news channels, the are lefty news channels, and if you want the utterly insane, there is always MSNBC.

  • mauser 98

    INGSOC

  • Exile1981

    I think facts should be in quotations in the article title.

  • Jay Currie

    This maybe Google’s Internet Explorer moment. For years IE was the default browser of choice and then it began to suck. Or other browsers sacked less. Microsoft decided it could make html “better” which meant whole sites would not work. And, surprisingly quickly it went from something like 90% market share to less than 30.

    If Google wants to offer “G-fact” as an option, great; as a default… I am off to the 20 other search engines and one of them is likely better.

    • Frau Katze

      I agree. They’ll start losing people.

    • Brett_McS

      It’s a very competitive market. Of course the government is intent on fixing that.

      • Jay Currie

        I agree. However, the search market is competitive and Bing is owned by a big enough company to avoid the BS… Oddly the company which fracked its browser.

        Search is not that hard. People will defect when they see a political thumb on the scales.

  • bob e

    do no evil .. ?? sho nuff

    • Xavier

      Rather Orwellian, isn’t it?