Really this is how it should work. It's a fairly safe default assumption that people are searching for recent information if the query matches a current news st

Really this is how it should work. It's a fairly safe default assumption that people are searching for recent information if the query matches a current news story. As an example of the opposite: In the days right after the earthquake and tsunami that struck Japan in 2011, I happened to search for "japan tsunami", without quotes, in both Google and Bing. The first page in Google was full of relevant news stories, with an extra link at the top to Google's own crisis assistance page. The first page in Bing was full of stories about 10 or 20 year old incidents. As I recall it, there was nothing whatsoever about the 2011 event. It was almost disconcerting. As an aside: why would the submitter use a readability.com link? That seems a bit rude to the original page, even though the article was tripe.