4 ms·

Google has banned 200 publishers since it passed a new policy against fake news

20 points by artsandsci 10y ago

shinyshorts 10y ago
All of a sudden they care about fake news... after their billionaire homie gets into office
- tdkl 10y ago
  You mean after their "homie" lost. https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%203-m&q=fake%20news https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%203-m&q=fak...
notpc 10y ago
It shouldn't be an ad network's job to adjudicate truth, especially given Google's monopolistic position. They should stick to selling and reselling eyeballs and clicks, and regulating things directly material to that, e.g. deceitful ad placement.
- lern_too_spel 10y ago
  This article is about deceptive publishers pretending to be well-known sites, not about anybody trying to be an arbiter of truth.
  - jamra 10y ago
    It specifically names propaganda sites. The problem though is that the definition of propaganda should not lie in the hands of google alone. Never hand over shackles that could one day be used on you.
    - lern_too_spel 10y ago
      You misread "impersonating news sites became an addition following the rapid rise of fake news, or propaganda sites."
- maxerickson 10y ago
  So they should be banned from providing their customers (the people buying ads) assurances about the sorts of content their ads will appear next to? Seems like that forces them to leave a lot of value on the table.
  - notpc 10y ago
    It doesn't sound like ad purchasers have much of a choice here.
nvr219 10y ago
I'd love to see the list of banned publishers.
SpikeDad 10y ago
Is that going to include Trump's Press Secretary?
akjainaj 10y ago
I'm not sure I want Google to tell me what's fake and what's not fake. This also means they're transitioning from being a neutral part to being curators.
- solipsism 10y ago
  This also means they're transitioning from being a neutral part to being curators. So you think Google shows you a list of sites sorted alphabetically by URL or something? Google is famous specifically for PageRank, which is curation.
  - akjainaj 10y ago
    But it is not manual curation, at least not officially. That's why the algorithm is so (in)famous, because it's an algorithm.
HoppedUpMenace 10y ago
Why not show a statement like they do with copyright removal requests and indicate to the user that there are flagged results in the search query, but give the option to view the results anyway? At least in that respect, they don't re-enforce the notion that news is being censored at the request of some third party or that Google is taking the vigilante route to culling fake news.
jamesmcintyre 10y ago
I wonder if it's any of these sites? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13208906 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13208906
- angry-hacker 10y ago
  What kind of bs is that?
cashmonkey85 10y ago
I feel like the title is fake news and should be banned. They are removing publishers from their ad network not baned from Google
- grzm 10y ago
  If you think the submission is not appropriate for HN, flag and move on.

20 points by artsandsci 10y ago

shinyshorts 10y ago

All of a sudden they care about fake news... after their billionaire homie gets into office

tdkl 10y ago
You mean after their "homie" lost. https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%203-m&q=fake%20news https://www.google.com/trends/explore?date=today%203-m&q=fak...

notpc 10y ago

It shouldn't be an ad network's job to adjudicate truth, especially given Google's monopolistic position. They should stick to selling and reselling eyeballs and clicks, and regulating things directly material to that, e.g. deceitful ad placement.

lern_too_spel 10y ago
This article is about deceptive publishers pretending to be well-known sites, not about anybody trying to be an arbiter of truth.
- jamra 10y ago
  It specifically names propaganda sites. The problem though is that the definition of propaganda should not lie in the hands of google alone. Never hand over shackles that could one day be used on you.
  - lern_too_spel 10y ago
    You misread "impersonating news sites became an addition following the rapid rise of fake news, or propaganda sites."
maxerickson 10y ago
So they should be banned from providing their customers (the people buying ads) assurances about the sorts of content their ads will appear next to? Seems like that forces them to leave a lot of value on the table.
- notpc 10y ago
  It doesn't sound like ad purchasers have much of a choice here.

nvr219 10y ago

I'd love to see the list of banned publishers.

SpikeDad 10y ago

Is that going to include Trump's Press Secretary?

akjainaj 10y ago

I'm not sure I want Google to tell me what's fake and what's not fake. This also means they're transitioning from being a neutral part to being curators.

solipsism 10y ago
This also means they're transitioning from being a neutral part to being curators. So you think Google shows you a list of sites sorted alphabetically by URL or something? Google is famous specifically for PageRank, which is curation.
- akjainaj 10y ago
  But it is not manual curation, at least not officially. That's why the algorithm is so (in)famous, because it's an algorithm.

HoppedUpMenace 10y ago

Why not show a statement like they do with copyright removal requests and indicate to the user that there are flagged results in the search query, but give the option to view the results anyway? At least in that respect, they don't re-enforce the notion that news is being censored at the request of some third party or that Google is taking the vigilante route to culling fake news.

jamesmcintyre 10y ago

I wonder if it's any of these sites? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13208906 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13208906

angry-hacker 10y ago
What kind of bs is that?

cashmonkey85 10y ago

I feel like the title is fake news and should be banned. They are removing publishers from their ad network not baned from Google

grzm 10y ago
If you think the submission is not appropriate for HN, flag and move on.