14 ms·

Censorship is about hiding information, this is adding additional information regarding accuracy, which you're free to ignore should you wish.

by ollysb 10y ago

UnoriginalGuy 10y ago
> Censorship is about hiding information Google says in the blog they push Fact Checked articles up the results list (and by implication push unchecked ones down).
- icebraining 10y ago
  No, Fact Checking articles will be pushed up. People here are reading this wrongly. The articles aren't marked as checked, but as themselves being fact checks (of the overall story).
  - 0x445442 10y ago
    If that's true its terribly poor labeling. I guarantee the majority of folks glancing at an article and seeing that tag will interpret it as the article being vetted not an article doing the vetting. If that's what they're doing their must be a reference article the "fact checking" article is pointing to. So I'd much rather have tags on the reference article pointing to the "fact checking" articles and tags on the "fact checking" articles pointing back to the reference article.
    - icebraining 10y ago
      If that's what they're doing their must be a reference article the "fact checking" article is pointing to. Why? Facts about a particular story are often reproduced by many sites. It's reasonable to run a check on those facts without specifically targeting a site. Snopes (which they use as an example) does this regularly.
ekianjo 10y ago
accuracy based on what? this blog post avoids going into any detail or example of how fact checking works in practice.
- curt15 10y ago
  Facts are falsifiable claims (e.g. there was a mass shooting in Sweden last night), not opinions where there's no objective notion of correctness. One casualty of the current political environment is that people forget what they were taught in school about the difference between facts and opinions.
  - merpnderp 10y ago
    Many news organizations reported that Trump mentioned a terrorist attack in Sweden the night before. The transcript shows he was ambiguous on what happened the night before. So in this case would Google mark these news organizations, most of them reputable as far as it's possible to be today, as fact checks even though they apparently hadn't bothered to read the full transcript?
  - leereeves 10y ago
    If only facts were so clear. What if the event is hidden? For example, the New Year's assaults in Cologne that the German government allegedly attempted to cover up.[1] That failed, but such efforts do sometimes succeed. 1: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12085182/Cover-up-over-Cologne-sex-assaults-blamed-on-migration-sensitivities.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/120...
  - james_pm 10y ago
    Interesting that the "facts" in your comment have now changed since you originally posted. Is it a "terror attack" or a "mass shooting" in Sweden that you are claiming Trump referenced?

Censorship is about hiding information, this is adding additional information regarding accuracy, which you're free to ignore should you wish.

by ollysb 10y ago

Censorship is about hiding information, this is adding additional information regarding accuracy, which you're free to ignore should you wish.

UnoriginalGuy 10y ago

> Censorship is about hiding information Google says in the blog they push Fact Checked articles up the results list (and by implication push unchecked ones down).

icebraining 10y ago
No, Fact Checking articles will be pushed up. People here are reading this wrongly. The articles aren't marked as checked, but as themselves being fact checks (of the overall story).
- 0x445442 10y ago
  If that's true its terribly poor labeling. I guarantee the majority of folks glancing at an article and seeing that tag will interpret it as the article being vetted not an article doing the vetting. If that's what they're doing their must be a reference article the "fact checking" article is pointing to. So I'd much rather have tags on the reference article pointing to the "fact checking" articles and tags on the "fact checking" articles pointing back to the reference article.
  - icebraining 10y ago
    If that's what they're doing their must be a reference article the "fact checking" article is pointing to. Why? Facts about a particular story are often reproduced by many sites. It's reasonable to run a check on those facts without specifically targeting a site. Snopes (which they use as an example) does this regularly.

ekianjo 10y ago

accuracy based on what? this blog post avoids going into any detail or example of how fact checking works in practice.

curt15 10y ago
Facts are falsifiable claims (e.g. there was a mass shooting in Sweden last night), not opinions where there's no objective notion of correctness. One casualty of the current political environment is that people forget what they were taught in school about the difference between facts and opinions.
- merpnderp 10y ago
  Many news organizations reported that Trump mentioned a terrorist attack in Sweden the night before. The transcript shows he was ambiguous on what happened the night before. So in this case would Google mark these news organizations, most of them reputable as far as it's possible to be today, as fact checks even though they apparently hadn't bothered to read the full transcript?
- leereeves 10y ago
  If only facts were so clear. What if the event is hidden? For example, the New Year's assaults in Cologne that the German government allegedly attempted to cover up.[1] That failed, but such efforts do sometimes succeed. 1: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/12085182/Cover-up-over-Cologne-sex-assaults-blamed-on-migration-sensitivities.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/germany/120...
- james_pm 10y ago
  Interesting that the "facts" in your comment have now changed since you originally posted. Is it a "terror attack" or a "mass shooting" in Sweden that you are claiming Trump referenced?