Especially when that company controls not only the ads that make news websites sustainable, but also what headlines people see, and where, when they search news

Especially when that company controls not only the ads that make news websites sustainable, but also what headlines people see, and where, when they search news-related topics. My 2 cents: drop the term "fake news" entirely and switch to a less vague euphemism like "hoax mills" or something. Switching the mental frame to some clearly shady, unknown "news" website/company that pumps out nothing but hoax or highly exaggerated stories will make discussions about how to deal with it less contentious. "Stop the proliferation and revenue sources of hoax mills" reads way better than "tackle fake news". This is a place Google rightly can and should responsibly step in (just like how they try to keep blatant scams and malware/phishing sites from first page search results). People just need to all be on the same page about what, specifically, Google is trying to stop.