Google wants to rank websites based on facts not links
Being trustworthy and accurate could help a web page rise up Google rankings if the search engine giant starts to measure quality by facts, not just links
Google could launch an effort to keep trolls and bad information at bay, with a program that would rank websites according to veracity, and sort results according to those rankings. Currently, the search engine ranks pages according to popularity, which means that pages containing unsubstantiated celebrity gossip or conspiracy theories, for example, show up very high.
Google has recently implemented a kind of Knowledge-Based Truth score lite with its medical search results. Now, doctors and real medical experts vet search results about health conditions, meaning anti-vaxx propaganda will not appear in the top results for a “measles” search, for instance.
Predictably those peddling non-science based info are freaking out because they'll lose traffic.
moar:
* http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2015/03/05/google-works-to-rank-sites-based-on-truthfulness.html
* https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22530102.600-google-wants-to-rank-websites-based-on-facts-not-links#.VPoOFbDF9ew
So…..Google wants a meritocracy? Sounds good. Perhaps we could get the professional victims out there to agree to this as well.
Whatcha mean "professional victims" +West Kagle?
I think what they're doing is nothing more than trying to weed out crap that doesn't have facts that support it versus just that which has a popular keyword + traffic. The anti-vaxx stuff is the perfect example. That crazy blond gal starts saying it causes autism (despite evidence), it becomes a trending/popular topic, sites pop up/post about it to gain traffic. If someplace like Buzzfeed picks it up with a catchy headline suddenly that is linked to, reshared, etc and it goes UP in rank… despite not being based on fact. The changes they would make would shove non-factual things lower in the results… not get rid of them, but place them lower in the ranking due to lack of evidence supporting the claims.
+Paul Spoerry
I'm busting balls about the po-vic thing. I do get nervous when they introduce anything that artificially alters search engines results. Perhaps it's the jaded, don't trust anything or anyone anymore thing I have going, but…..yeah, I don't trust anything or anyone anymore.
OK except that Google has a vested interested in bringing the most relevant results. It's kind of their core business. Also keep in mind that Google has continuously evolved their algorithms because people figure out ways to manipulate the results. For instance, one signal in ranking was the number of backlinks there were to your site. So black hat SEO dudes would create farms of website with nothing but links… all to make the site rise in ranking. Obviously, that's not the intention behind the backlink so Google had to respond by altering the algorithm. I think this is just more of the same.
+Paul Spoerry
I understand. It's just that someone has to setup the parameters for the algorithms, and as a human being, they are not beyond reproach. Not saying that it's guaranteed they would manipulate search results for other than honest reasons, but these companies (ones that are involved in providing information to us in one way or another), don't exactly have stellar records. They have been caught doing exactly what I just said.
Plus as long as these companies continue to work with governments or other organizations to censor 'bad' things from the net, there will always be a reason to look sideways at their 'good' intentions. I want precisely what they are proposing, as most people do. That's what makes it so dangerous We want that so much that we are willing to trust them implicitly, and they have done nothing to deserve that trust.
We may end up with a situation where sites are buried because of the ideology of their content rather than the validity of it. I know it sounds like tin-foil hat time, but given what has come to pass before, is it so hard to believe?
No… I understand the notion. But again, in this case Google will WANT to bring the most relevant. It's not like if you search for "anti-vax" that they won't show you results. Searches that accurately reflect what you're querying is in their best interest. Also in their best interest is accurate results period. So if you search for vaccines and autism this would filter the crap from the real stuff.
+Paul Spoerry
I know. Still, trust is very hard to come by these days.