3 ms·

Andrea, I know personally how frustrating this can be. I've dealt with something similar with a relative's Knowledge Panel, and dealt with this over and over wi

Andrea, I know personally how frustrating this can be. I've dealt with something similar with a relative's Knowledge Panel, and dealt with this over and over with multiple people who've asked me to help them fix and update their Knowledge Panel. The first thing that needs to be done is that YOU need to claim the KP. It appears that it's not claimed right now, and you can have control over what appears there (and suggest edits/changes/updates). If you haven't claimed the KP, then you can just leave feedback that seems to just go into a "black hole" and it's never addressed. I know there are ways legally to deal with this, but the best way to deal with it is to claim the Knowledge Panel. Then, there are ways to increase the knowledge that is in the Knowledge Graph so that the information there is not confusing--they're reaching for a photo, for example, and there are ways to overcome that. For example, you can use other photos (even they're not photos of yourself) to get them to populate on the KG and of someone else. The issue here is the Knowledge Graph doesn't have enough information about you, so it's just taking the next most "prominent" data that it has. You can help define the information in the Knowledge Graph by feeding it information. You don't need to be "fighting" the KG, you should be doing quite the opposite: give it the right information so it's correct. The Knowledge Graph is not all controlled by Google--other search engines use it, such as Bing. The issue appears to be with Google's Knowledge Panel, but the issue is actually with the Knowledge Graph itself, and not Google. The Knowledge Graph is made up of sources (see the list here: https://kalicube.pro/trusted-sources https://kalicube.pro/trusted-sources) and by working on your own KG entry and feeding it more information, you'll be strengthening your own KG entry for your name, and all these issues with confusion and the wrong information being displayed will go away. There's really no need to do anything legally around this, it's just a case that the KG doesn't have enough information about to make the right decisions on what to display. I don't see the FTC, BBB or IC3 helping in any way. Fastest way to correct this is to feed the KG the right information.

useragent86 5y ago
> The Knowledge Graph is made up of sources (see the list here: https://kalicube.pro/trusted-sources https://kalicube.pro/trusted-sources) and by working on your own KG entry and feeding it more information, you'll be strengthening your own KG entry for your name, and all these issues with confusion and the wrong information being displayed will go away. > There's really no need to do anything legally around this, it's just a case that the KG doesn't have enough information about to make the right decisions on what to display. I don't see the FTC, BBB or IC3 helping in any way. Fastest way to correct this is to feed the KG the right information. You may be right, but that procedure sounds an awful lot like, "If we make enough sacrifices to the sky god, maybe it will send rain, and the crops will grow again." Is this the future of having access to accurate knowledge? Throw text at a black-box AI and hope it changes its output?
AndreaVass 5y ago
Thanks for your kind words but I just wanted to say that Google has to abide by the same rules as others who “publish” information. For example, The New York Times cannot publish the wrong photo of a person inside of an article, then demand that someone turn over their driver’s license, a selfie, and other personal identifying information in order to have the false information deleted. Btw, there was no guarantee they would have deleted it if I had claimed it- they said they would use their discretion. If you are going to publish something, the burden is on you to verify the information. If it cannot be verified, it cannot be published. That is not my opinion but basic journalistic ethics and the law. The problem is Google is claiming their Knowledge Panel is simply a random search result and they are not responsible for it. I didn’t want to turn over my personal information to a corporation that had already been careless in this situation. Furthermore, it was clear that me and the pastor were two different people as both of us have been written about in the press and have different LinkedIn accounts. Also, once they saw their knowledge graph had produced several different results, they should have deleted the the panel altogether since it was clearly not working. To leave false information up because I didn’t “claim” the knowledge panel is unethical and against the law. Forget about the fact that they are currently being sued by 36 states and the Department of Justice for unfair business practices. I wouldn’t advise anyone to give them a driver’s license and a selfie etc.
- bhartzer 5y ago
  I agree with what you’re saying, but one could argue that Google is not a publisher or a nees organization. The knowledge graph isn’t owned by google, it’s a collection of data that many sources contribute to. If google were a publisher or news or media organization it would be different.
  - AndreaVass 5y ago
    This is the argument that needs to take place. Over the past several years, I was forced to understand what “publish” actually means in legal terms. Spoke with many lawyers. In the beginning, I was surprised to hear a lawyer refer to sending information in an email to a third party as “publishing” something. Whenever you communicate information to a third party, you are in fact “publishing” that information, and you become liable if communicating the wrong facts. You don’t have to be a news organization to publish information or to be held liable—I just used the New York Times as an example to help someone imagine what they might think if they read a NYT article and later found out the wrong person was pictured inside of the article. The truth is, the law applies to every single person/ entity who chooses to publish (communicate or make publicly known to an audience) information. Legally, we are all held to the same standard whether we realize it or not. Some just expect more from a company like Google, or an actual news organization. I hope this makes sense.
CRConrad 5y ago
> The first thing that needs to be done is that YOU need to claim the KP. > I know there are ways legally to deal with this, but the best way to deal with it is to claim the Knowledge Panel. Can't you even hear how ass-backwards this sounds? The existence and wrongness of this shitty "panel" thing shouldn't be the OP's problem. She didn't build it, didn't order it, didn't ask for it, didn't want it. It is wholly, solely, only and alonely Google's problem, Google's fault, and Google's responsibility to clean up their mess. Stop putting the onus on the OP; stop painting the "solution" in the terms -- on the terms -- of the perpetrator.

useragent86 5y ago

> The Knowledge Graph is made up of sources (see the list here: https://kalicube.pro/trusted-sources https://kalicube.pro/trusted-sources) and by working on your own KG entry and feeding it more information, you'll be strengthening your own KG entry for your name, and all these issues with confusion and the wrong information being displayed will go away. > There's really no need to do anything legally around this, it's just a case that the KG doesn't have enough information about to make the right decisions on what to display. I don't see the FTC, BBB or IC3 helping in any way. Fastest way to correct this is to feed the KG the right information. You may be right, but that procedure sounds an awful lot like, "If we make enough sacrifices to the sky god, maybe it will send rain, and the crops will grow again." Is this the future of having access to accurate knowledge? Throw text at a black-box AI and hope it changes its output?

AndreaVass 5y ago

Thanks for your kind words but I just wanted to say that Google has to abide by the same rules as others who “publish” information. For example, The New York Times cannot publish the wrong photo of a person inside of an article, then demand that someone turn over their driver’s license, a selfie, and other personal identifying information in order to have the false information deleted. Btw, there was no guarantee they would have deleted it if I had claimed it- they said they would use their discretion. If you are going to publish something, the burden is on you to verify the information. If it cannot be verified, it cannot be published. That is not my opinion but basic journalistic ethics and the law. The problem is Google is claiming their Knowledge Panel is simply a random search result and they are not responsible for it. I didn’t want to turn over my personal information to a corporation that had already been careless in this situation. Furthermore, it was clear that me and the pastor were two different people as both of us have been written about in the press and have different LinkedIn accounts. Also, once they saw their knowledge graph had produced several different results, they should have deleted the the panel altogether since it was clearly not working. To leave false information up because I didn’t “claim” the knowledge panel is unethical and against the law. Forget about the fact that they are currently being sued by 36 states and the Department of Justice for unfair business practices. I wouldn’t advise anyone to give them a driver’s license and a selfie etc.

bhartzer 5y ago
I agree with what you’re saying, but one could argue that Google is not a publisher or a nees organization. The knowledge graph isn’t owned by google, it’s a collection of data that many sources contribute to. If google were a publisher or news or media organization it would be different.
- AndreaVass 5y ago
  This is the argument that needs to take place. Over the past several years, I was forced to understand what “publish” actually means in legal terms. Spoke with many lawyers. In the beginning, I was surprised to hear a lawyer refer to sending information in an email to a third party as “publishing” something. Whenever you communicate information to a third party, you are in fact “publishing” that information, and you become liable if communicating the wrong facts. You don’t have to be a news organization to publish information or to be held liable—I just used the New York Times as an example to help someone imagine what they might think if they read a NYT article and later found out the wrong person was pictured inside of the article. The truth is, the law applies to every single person/ entity who chooses to publish (communicate or make publicly known to an audience) information. Legally, we are all held to the same standard whether we realize it or not. Some just expect more from a company like Google, or an actual news organization. I hope this makes sense.

CRConrad 5y ago

> The first thing that needs to be done is that YOU need to claim the KP. > I know there are ways legally to deal with this, but the best way to deal with it is to claim the Knowledge Panel. Can't you even hear how ass-backwards this sounds? The existence and wrongness of this shitty "panel" thing shouldn't be the OP's problem. She didn't build it, didn't order it, didn't ask for it, didn't want it. It is wholly, solely, only and alonely Google's problem, Google's fault, and Google's responsibility to clean up their mess. Stop putting the onus on the OP; stop painting the "solution" in the terms -- on the terms -- of the perpetrator.