3 ms·
Problem is, can you algorithmically determine that breitbart.com and the likes can't be trusted, if they get tons of links, mentions, etc. just like the reputab
by danmaz74 10y ago
Problem is, can you algorithmically determine that breitbart.com and the likes can't be trusted, if they get tons of links, mentions, etc. just like the reputable news sources?
- Tempest1981 10y agoMaybe all linkers shouldn't be treated as equal. Random FB/Twitter posts reveal interest in the topic, but not accuracy of the article. But I assumed Google was accounting for this already.
- CM30 10y agoThat's exactly what page rank was about to begin with. However... 1. Various 'credible' news sources also link to dodgy sites and articles, either when criticising it, posting a story said sites first ran or simply because they've fallen for 'fake news'. 2. A lot of trust signals are easily gamed, like .edu links going for a fortune on SEO forums. 3. At some point, quantity will probably win out over quality.
- jacquesm 10y agoIndeed, and that's the heart of the problem. Something like Google news needs more than just algorithms.
- danmaz74 10y agoOTOH, that's also a problem, because any editorial choice is politically debatable... I'm afraid there is no easy solution.
- raverbashing 10y agoBefore we get to political leaning there's a small issue of journalistic integrity and the difference between editorials and news articles
- pjc50 10y agoI'm afraid there is ultimately no way to not be political. Having these kind of anti-news sites appear as "news" on Google is not just poisoning their reputation but making them complicit in whatever disaster finally results from it. The worst case scenario is genocide e.g.: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_T%C3%A9l%C3%A9vision_Libre_des_Mille_Collines https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_T%C3%A9l%C3%A9vision_Lib...