Google Declares War On Alternative Media: Plans To Punish “False News” By Halting Ad Revenue

archive.is/2bkQm

How can Google decide what's true or false? How will this affect the future of news?

Other urls found in this thread:

bbc.com/news/uk-37995600
denverpost.com/2016/11/05/there-is-no-such-thing-as-the-denver-guardian/
youtube.com/watch?v=y1oEoCRkLRI
youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw
fortune.com/2015/10/05/alphabet-google-evil/
theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/25/hillary-clinton-syria-no-fly-zones-russia-us-war
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

drumpfkin detected

what does it matter. you won't know for sure till the end of your lifetime

Likely by validating the credibility of the site. It's a good thing, sites like herbalpseudomedicineisreal.com deserve to die.

With any luck it'll improve online news.

Election is over, you can stop trying to troll trump supporters and Sup Forums now.

kike detected

It was an obvious 0/10 troll you moron.

The problem is - sites with an agenda will most likely be financed from another party and wont give a fuck if google stops "financing" them.
Credibilty measure trolling on sites that state facts people disagree with will also be a thing.

POST-TRUTH

Maybe something to do with this.

bbc.com/news/uk-37995600

Facts must be checked, falsehoods must be punished.

theyre going all out against alternative media and alternative news. trying to salvage their dying horse just like comcast did by increasing prices.

hopefully trump has something planned to shake it all up.

>muh drudge and dailystormer

> hopefully trump has something planned to shake it all up.
You're a moron, and he's a moron.

Nobody takes the dailystormer seriously.

CNN is reliable and Breitbart isnt.

t. Joseph Shekelstein

They're too slow.

The alt-right groups have already started pamphleteering out in the real world, as well as on many unrelated websites.

Will this revoke ad money from shit tier satire sites like the Onion or do they fall under a different rule?

>google releases self driving cars
>fact check says its unrealistic and refuses to show it in the results

What's the reasoning behind this? How can you be so dumb that you can't figure out if a site is a legitimate source of news or not?

...

maybe, just maybe they have an ulterior motive.

Goodbye Salon and Buzzfeed!
Wait? Not them? Brietbart and Infowars?

People are retarded, you just have to look here to see.

Let me guess, all those mainstream sites that assured us that Clinton was going to win the elections with a 99% of probability are going to be deemed as "trustworthy" by Google, right?

based google

How is this going to stop retarded people from being retarded in anyway? If they didn't have the critical thinking skills to determine that infowars isn't a reputable source of news in the first place they're probably not going to do much better now.

This. Guarantee they're getting kickbacks from this somehow.

It doesn't do anything to stop stupid people. It just makes it so these sites have to find ads from somewhere else.

but of course, user

It's not to stop fake news, anyone that's paid attention to this election has the same idea about our current media circumstances.
This effort is to silence the fallout of the over hanging narrative that won Trump the election. Just pg13 word choice.

Then why are they framing this like it's to preserve journalistic integrity or something?

waste of quints

>a Princeton professor's blog
>mainstream news site
>Fox News
>alternative media

>what is cherry picking

>They're only tracking false news because Hillary lost
>Implying that's the reason why she llost

t. Vox

>How will this affect the future of news?
censorship is real

Not an argument.

>what is your Twitter feed
>what is your Facebook feed
>what is cable news

For those of you with conspiracy fantasies about Google hand-censoring sites to push an agenda, everything is AI now.

If something is pushing an agenda, it's either an AI glitch, because real people are pushing an agenda that the AI learns, or Skynet won.

No, it's all fucked.

>If something is pushing an agenda, it's either an AI glitch

have you followed this election at all? everything is censored like fucking crazy ALREADY. they're just going to stop hiding it now

is this satire?

They're going to derank websites that were created for the sole purpose of scraping other websites for news stories and spamming the viewer with ads for happening to stumble upon them.

so buzzfeed?

wew lad, The Onion is screwed

Apparently they're specifically targeting sites based in third world countries because during the election someone made a whole bunch of these fake sites and started spamming them EVERYWHERE. Some of them weren't even reposting articles they were just automatically generating gibberish.

denverpost.com/2016/11/05/there-is-no-such-thing-as-the-denver-guardian/

Just track the IPs of regular visitors to infowars and breitbart and have them institutionalized.
Where they belong. For the public good, and their own.

>this rhetoric will surely work this time

Who fucking cares.

There's too much fake news going around.

This is why we went to Iraq and Libya and Syria and destroyed countries based on lies.

>This is why we went to Iraq and Libya and Syria and destroyed countries based on lies.
We went into Iraq because Saddam wouldn't admit that his WMD program was a bluff against Iran. We went into Afghanistan because the Taliban wouldn't hand over Osama. If they had they'd still be running the show.
We never went into Libya. The French and British did.
We are only giving air support to our Syrian allies. We don't want another Libya, do we?
All those countries were well fucked up long before we got there.

>Syrian allies
lol
We went into Libya because we couldn't go directly into Syria. Hence Gaddafi's death.

And no, they weren't Henry Kissinger. lol

What will they do about blatantly toxic liberal websites then?

Twenty bucks says nothing happens to sites like Daily Kos. Fuck ((((google))))

#MentallyHill

Jesus Christ, this is fucking sick.

>Alt-right - An ideological grouping associated with extreme conservative or reactionary viewpoints, characterized by a rejection of mainstream politics and by the use of online media to disseminate deliberately controversial content

They're just trying to normalize the idea of censorship.

American internet will be like Chinese internet within the next decade or two. The only difference, is that here it will be controlled by corporations instead of the government.

If you believe all this garbage then you're the victim of fake news.

>Former DIA Director Michael Flynn: It was America's decision to fund and arm ISIS

youtube.com/watch?v=y1oEoCRkLRI

>General Wesley Clark: Wars Were Planned - Seven Countries In Five Years

youtube.com/watch?v=9RC1Mepk_Sw

Google's motto is no longer "Don't be evil", it's "Do the Right Thing"
fortune.com/2015/10/05/alphabet-google-evil/

Always relevant.

I think about this scene all the time over the years it really come true. I'm not sure if its good or bad but I agree there's too much noise and it needs to be curated

>Colonel: All this junk data preserved in an unfiltered state, growing at an alarming rate.
>Rose: It will only slow down social progress, reduce the rate of evolution.

Only in USA. If they had to apply this rule in Spain all major news networks would be banned.

>someone else who likes these videos
Good taste, user.

>sbane
>freedoms
Haha please.

>CBS
>Notable properties
>Jeporady

Yes Alex, I'll take kek for 100.

It's not "google deciding" what is true or false, it's an AI sorting shit out. It's going to make news in the future make sense (hopefully).

he can just cut them out and go straight for the alt media only. just do interviews and press on infowars.com BILL CLINTON IS A RAPIST!

good breitabart and other racist sites deserve to die with their clickbait titles.

Well if they're looking to censor opinions I think any reasonable and civil folks would have to be against that.

At the same time, I have to agree that the architecture of social media has fundamentally altered the way that humans receive and process information and we can't keep pretending that the status quo is going to serve the interests of humanity. Our values, media, and perhaps our legislation is going to have to adapt.

It's generally true that "people get the government they deserve" but the fact is we can't afford to leave it at that anymore. When our country was founded there were no nuclear weapons. There was no industrialized revolution. There was no NSA. If country X fucked up, then they fucked up, and maybe they imploded, and that was it. Nowadays if the electorate fucks up, we stand a chance of annihalating human civilization via nuclear war or lack of EPA or by granting or by finding ourselves under the heal of an oligarchy that the general citizenry has no way to depose.

We need to find some way short of censorship to ensure people are getting information that's going to sustain civilization rather than threaten it. We can't allow echo-chambers continue because instead of facilitating enlightened perspectives, the internet now obstructs their formation. We've already fucked up multiple times and the stakes keep getting higher.

it better be

The danger isn't even racism; it's simply spreading delusion and misinformation to an effectively captive audience with impunity.
We don't have to use breitbart as an example; that's just the general reality of the dialectic our media fosters. This what happens when you have ulterior motives from ideological or political or business interests mixing with the internet and people looking to be educated.

How old is this image and how mentally retarded is/was it's creator?

Jeopardy has been owned by Sony since at least 1984 and has never been owned by CBS ever.

Except google and every tech company is dodgy and won't do it properly, look at Facebook news, it's broken. Just a little while ago a fake article became very popular due to it, "Mark Zuckerburg dies at age 33". Let's not even go into how convoluted and broken many of the things google does are. In addition, they exist for money. They will certainly take bribes and be coerced in other ways, they have shown that they already have been so. In that their search engine has exceptions and broken functionality with certain events occurring. Too much corruption for it to work.

>1984
Were already living in it

It's not censorship; they're just halting ad revenue. Businesses don't advertise on media that they don't want to be associated with, that is quite standard.

Because Google is God

Checked. Re-checked.
Confirmed.
Thats five fours.

The censorship of the internet begins. It is a sad day for America. You won't stop this unless Trump actually gets into office and also manages to sort out (((those))) that have usurped your country.

>yfw the eventual outcome is two corporations owning 99.99% of everything

Trump is the one that would be doing the sensoring given how thin skinned and fascist is.
Google is aa private business and should not have to advertise with anyone they do not agree. The opposite would effectively constitute censorship in favor of promoting a breitbart and infowars perspectives over other media, to say businesses must advertise on them

>g-guys, trust us, she's a peasan--err I mean average citizen too!

>Trump is the one that would be doing the sensoring given how thin skinned and fascist is.

HAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHA.

We won. Fuck you.

We disagree with alex jones and breitbart. This country belongs to us as well, we are its rightful inheritors, and we uphold the legacy of the age of reason.
If you promote censorship by the government, go found your own country, because fascists do not belong here.

So now people wish google would censor stuff, because they are too stupid to recognize bullshit?
Ohh nice that is definitly going well burgers.

Policy based upon populism and corporatism won, policy based upon science and general welfare lost.
If you want to enjoy your bitter satisfaction then do so while you can, because now we have ato risk of destroying our climate from your disdain for science and empathy.
Trump despises the weak and the vulnerable. His is an ugly and brutish worldview. I genuinely feel for you and for him. In the words of our founder, I hope you can learn to find beauty in things.

> This country belongs to us as well, we are its rightful inheritors, and we uphold the legacy of the age of reason.

Your arrogance is astounding. Those on the liberal left are anything and everything but reasonable.

>If you promote censorship by the government, go found your own country, because fascists do not belong here.

No, I support absolute free reign of information. Nothing should be censored.

I wonder, are you even replying to the intended person?

Why aren't you advertising on salon.com? Do you support censorship.
>because they are too stupid to recognize bullshit?
That cow is obviously out of the barn. Now we have to decide how to handle it.

>Policy based upon populism and corporatism won, policy based upon science and general welfare lost

Popular policy won voters - wow, stop the presses. Policy based on platitudes coming from a verified liar didn't - there's your reason.

>If you want to enjoy your bitter satisfaction then do so while you can, because now we have ato risk of destroying our climate from your disdain for science and empathy

Waahhah, the sky is falling! Get real, cuntflaps. Clinton would have likely started WW3 resulting in nuclear conflict so you don't get to plead moral superiority.

>Trump despises the weak and the vulnerable. His is an ugly and brutish worldview. I genuinely feel for you and for him. In the words of our founder, I hope you can learn to find beauty in things.

Flowerly bullshit. Go sit in your safespace you faggot.

...

>Those on the liberal left are anything and everything but reasonable.
Leftist policy is at least driven by scientific expertise and empathy. Some say too much empathy; perhaps they are right. But at least the democrats are fucking trying. Trump couldn't have crammed more old guard and lobbyists into his team if he had tried.

>No, I support absolute free reign of information. Nothing should be censored.
One can smell this bullshit fromis a mile away. You're a white nationalist masquerading as a conservative. You folks have come out of the woodwork because you're grasping at the straw that Trump's populism could be used to make the rest of us feel like outsiders in our own home.

how are you guys so ridiculously thin-skinned

>the democrats were looking to start ww3!!
its not OK to get your news from infowars

>One can smell this bullshit fromis a mile away. >You're a white nationalist masquerading as a conservative.

Really now? Even although I am asian? How does that work? Oh wait, everyone you disagree with is a "white supremacist". You people lack any self awareness. You lost because you are so wrapped up in your grievance culture identity politics bullshit.

>hillary wanting a no-fly zone is now a conspiracy

>the democrats were looking to start ww3!!

Here's just one source that says you are a lying sack of shit.

>Retired senior US military pilots are increasingly alarmed that Hillary Clinton’s proposal for “no-fly zones” in Syria could lead to a military confrontation with Russia that could escalate to levels that were previously unthinkable in the post-cold war world.

theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/25/hillary-clinton-syria-no-fly-zones-russia-us-war

I expect you to make up some crap now to counter the facts. Please, go ahead, you only prove me right.

>Even although I am asian?
why would you bother replying with an anecdote

>Oh wait, everyone you disagree with is a "white supremacist".
no, the folks that came out of the woodwork to label themselves "not extreme-right; alt-right!" following the election were white nationalists.

>You lost because you are so wrapped up in your grievance culture identity politics bullshit.
probably; so what? Trump is still shit for everyone.

HOLY SHIT SOMEONE SAID SOMETHING!!
THAT MEANS THEY HAVE TO DO IT NOW, AND NOTHING ELSE CAN OR WILL EVER CHANGE THEIR MIND!!! WW3!!!

>why would you bother
>no, the folks that came out of the woodwork to label themselves
>probably; so what?

LOL. This is what a sub-100 IQ looks like. Hillary knows her audience.

Are you serious? She fucking hates Putin.

there are gradients of relationship between "I'm going to kill you" and "help me win this election and you can have Ukraine"

That's the power of the free market!

>It's generally true that "people get the government they deserve" but the fact is we can't afford to leave it at that anymore. When our country was founded there were no nuclear weapons. There was no industrialized revolution. There was no NSA. If country X fucked up, then they fucked up, and maybe they imploded, and that was it. Nowadays if the electorate fucks up, we stand a chance of annihalating human civilization via nuclear war or lack of EPA or by granting or by finding ourselves under the heal of an oligarchy that the general citizenry has no way to depose

That sounds a lot like a very nice justification for despotism.

Sounds reasonable to me.
>How can Google decide what's true or false?
Maybe they'll just Google it.