Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Tackles Fake News With Global Fact-Checking Rollout (betanews.com)

Posted by msmash on from the doing-its-part dept.

Google is calling on fact-checking organizations to help it bust fake news -- but it's starting in a small way. From a report: Google's Fact Check feature is not new, but today the search giant is rolling out the feature around the world. A global rollout is important if such a tool is to have any real impact. It's all well and good have reports fact-checked on one side of the world, but it's of little use if the same fake stories remain unquestioned and untested elsewhere. Google is doing its part by making the Fact Check label available in Google News everywhere, and spreading it into search results in all languages as well. The Fact Check label has been around since October, providing an at-a-glance way to determine whether or not a particular story has been verified as true. Google admits that it will not be possible to fact-check every single search result it displays, and the company points out that it is not responsible for the actual fact-checking process.

14 of 230 comments (clear)

  1. Who decides what is fact? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Is this fact checking going to be like Politifact, which has said that an article or tweet is "mostly false" while saying that the facts it contains are true?

    --
    The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    1. Re: Who decides what is fact? by ArmoredDragon · · Score: 4, Informative

      You can use many truths to draw a false conclusion. Conspiracy theorists do it all the time.

    2. Re: Who decides what is fact? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A conclusion is not a fact. So, what you want is someone to check that the articles reach the "correct" conclusions?

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
    3. Re:Who decides what is fact? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      The Onion.

    4. Re:Who decides what is fact? by David_Hart · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Is this fact checking going to be like Politifact, which has said that an article or tweet is "mostly false" while saying that the facts it contains are true?

      A fact is either true or false. What Politifact is commenting on is whether the opinion, belief, or conclusion drawn from those facts is "mostly false".

      For example, the unemployment rate has dropped. Donald Trump is the president. Therefore President Trump is responsible and should be praised for lowering the unemployment rate. The first two sentences facts, the last sentence is an opinion. The opinion would be considered, by most, to be "mostly false". Yes, his presidency may have had an effect on business expansion and hiring people but most of these business plans were in place well before President Trump took office.

    5. Re:Who decides what is fact? by Attila+Dimedici · · Score: 3, Interesting

      What Politifact is commenting on is whether the opinion, belief, or conclusion drawn from those facts is "mostly false".

      In other words, Politifact is NOT a FACT checking organization. They are checking whether or not the opinions presented are "correct". If the facts presented in the story are true, I do not need someone else to tell me if the conclusions the author reaches are true or not. If someone is going to claim to be a fact checker, I want them to limit themselves to checking the facts. If they do not, it is just a matter of time, and probably not much of it, before they are calling fake news true because it reaches the "correct" conclusions (or leads people to do so) even though the facts are completely false.

      --
      The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
  2. Isn't this abuse of a monopoly??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Isn't this google using their almost total dominance of search to control the news industry? If a story happens to be true but doesn't fit with the narrative that google wants to put forth could it get burried?

    It's not just about libertarian or conservative bloggers. What if an advertiser, let's say big agribusiness, doesn't want peta exposes of bad farms to be seen? Could that be labeled "fake news"?

  3. Google is ... by AnthonywC · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Ministry of Truth.

  4. Next: Ministry of Truth by pipingguy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Will there be a truth detection algorithm? Who will be in charge of it? Will it be co-opted? By whom? Can't be just ban BadThink and make it punishable by banishment or death or something?

  5. What if by OrangeTide · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What if the fact checking is fake? Look at urbandictionary, I'd argue that less than half of the entries are accurate. It's a fake dictionary.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  6. Great! by ooloorie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They should start with fact-checking fake news like: "Women make 80% of what men do." or "Climate change threatens the future of humanity." or "Gun control reduces homicides." or "The welfare state helps people become productive members of society." or "Paying more for education than we do improves educational outcomes."

    I suspect it isn't that kind of fake news that they are going to fact check.

  7. Google deciding what I see and read? by stickyboot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    This has a very fishy smell of censorship to it.

  8. Trump DID win by s.petry · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Hillary lost the Electoral College, which is how _EVERY_SINGLE_PRESIDENT in US History has been elected. We do not elect Presidents by popular vote, and never have. The reason for this is solid, and I can only recommend you do your homework instead of repeating bullshit talking points handed down by people who LOST the election. (Not unique to this batch, but this is certainly the worst I can recall).

    Following the law is not a "technicality", it's called LAW. Your ignorance of the law demonstrates a big problem with the left.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  9. Endless vituperation without facts by AutodidactLabrat · · Score: 3

    Notice how the right trolls are out in force claiming fact checking is biased therefore must not be done?
    Knew this was coming
    Can't win the argument, lie about the evidence.