Googles new 'fact-check' feature almost exclusively targets conservative sites

[Venant]

At first, I was personally skeptical of this claim, and I noticed a few weeks ago somebody pointed out that even this site had a google analysis of its content popping up when you search for it. The 'fact checker' is part of the site description that pops up to the right of the search results, which also includes a blurb about the website.

So I plugged a few searches in:

Breitbart: Had a list of 'reviewed claims'
Daily Caller: Had a list of 'reviewed claims'
Daily Wire: Had a list of 'reviewed claims'
The Federalist: Had a list of 'reviewed claims'

Vox: No list of 'reviewed claims'
Slate: No list of 'reviewed claims'
Huffington Post: No list of 'reviewed claims'
Washington Post: No list of 'reviewed claims'

Interesting enough, mainstream media television networks seem to be treated in a completely different manner by google than primarily internet sources.

What should be made of this, is it more social engineering by a big tech firm, or do progressive sites like Vox and HuffPo simply never post anything that could be disputed by a fact checker?

Some articles on this:
http://dailycaller.com/2018/01/09/go...rvative-sites/
http://thefederalist.com/2018/01/10/...w_BvlA.twitter

[sarahtasher]

You are really asking why Alex Jones is more checked than CNN ? Is this a joke ?

[Darkeon]

You are really asking why Alex Jones is more checked than CNN ? Is this a joke ?

No, but CNN is definitely one!

[Zeek Daniels]

I love how even when you read "fact checking" articles where maybe someone like Trump or someone in his administration says something about what a democrat or a liberal did and the "fact check" will make up some crappy excuse as to why they are wrong.

[Sorshen]

Maybe... they lie more?

[primalmatter]

You are really asking why Alex Jones is more checked than CNN ? Is this a joke ?

Not really to my knowledge alex jones hasn't tried to blackmail someone to virtual signal...

[Fitheach]

That is because only Left-Wing views are correct, and Right-Wing views are false.

infracted - trolling

[sarahtasher]

Not really to my knowledge alex jones hasn't tried to blackmail someone to virtual signal...

No, he just squeak like a rat about sex tunnels below pizzerias. Much better.

[Zoldor]

Not really to my knowledge alex jones hasn't tried to blackmail someone to virtual signal...

Blackmail works best with facts.

For as much as the right loves to hate the liberal tech corporations, I'm not seeing any fewer of them on Facebook, Twitter, or using Google products. Might be a step in the right direction, or is it that no right wingers have created anything on the scale of what those liberal tech companies have. Odd.

[primalmatter]

Blackmail works best with facts

You got me there.

[sarahtasher]

That is because only Left-Wing views are correct, and Right-Wing views are false.

A typical ''LEFT'' view on Trump is that he is an incompetent sycophant, a typical RIGHT view on Obama is that he is a KUMMUNIST MOZLEM SATANIST GAY THAT IS THERE TO STEAL YAH GUNS !

[Austilias]

It's obvious what Google 'is' nowadays.

They drew up their own version of Orwell's List, only for conservative-minded employees. Make of what what you will.

[Vizardlorde]

OK I guess google is biased then. Stop using it then

This you need to build your own alternative search engine with your own fact checks showing 150% of claims coming from left wing media are fake news.

[vindicatorx]

I mean it's a new feature the sites you listed are known huge offenders and seeing our president quotes them regularly as factual I would prefer to see sites like those targeted first. I'm sure they will get all the liberal sites eventually. I mean shit the Drudge report hasn't been rated yet and they straight up make shit up.

[Trassk]

Maybe... they lie more?

no dear, no, all people lie and bullshit their way into gaining a step on power. Doesn't matter if its right or left, they all do it.

[Theodarzna]

Don't use these platforms in English. Hard to be censored if the censors haven't a clue what you are saying.

Or get off social media, I did that and am happier for it.

[primalmatter]

This will only increase. Twitter, FaceBook, Google, etc, are all including fact checking as part of their platforms using AI/ML. I think I, and a few others brought this up a while back.

Corporations are going to control the content that is on their network, because it increases their bottom lines if more people are happy than not. And "more" people live in urban centers... so conservative viewpoints (that are perceived as bigoted to most in urban centers) are going to be unpopular/questioned by default.

Well... till certain members start making trouble...

I think it all will pass in time. Most likely when most boomers get the surprise that all their charity means they no longer get to retire.

[Caaethil]

Nothing wrong with flagging conservative sites if conservative sites are the ones spreading the misinformation they're aiming to stop. I'm not especially interested in fact-checking the fact-checker right now, so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.

What I'm not entirely keen on is the world's largest search engine - probably the world's greatest tool for finding information - deciding to also be the judge and jury. Because even if it's not happening right now, the potential exists to manipulate people.

[Draco-Onis]

It's obvious what Google 'is' nowadays.

They drew up their own version of Orwell's List, only for conservative-minded employees. Make of what what you will.

But infowars is not flagged in this and they are barely a science fiction site let alone a news site. It seems like it is just in the beta phase and you conservative snowflakes are getting upset already.

[primalmatter]

It depends on the type of conservative we are talking about.

There is a case to be made about illegal immigration; we still have borders, and maintaining a secure border is a legal matter. But not one about banning certain people from entering because you don't like their race. Which is what the current conservative stance seems to be.

You can talk people into securing borders, and making legal immigration more streamlined, and helping the border countries (Mexico) stabilize their government/law/corruption, etc.

But calling for clearly bigoted social issues is probably not going to be a huge change when it comes to acceptance.

Generation Z is on average still as "liberal" on social issues as Gen Z/Y (depending on which poll you go by). They do tend to be more conservative on economic issues, and more libertarian about laws in generel.

If conservatives want (mainstream) media to not see them a bigoted kooks, look to people like S. E. Cupp, Meghan McCain, Ana Navarro. All three are conservative, but most do not see them as bigots. A lot of Liberals may disagree with them, but they respect them.

I can see where you are coming from however call me jaded but I don't think it is going to happen. I see the extreme right (whatever they want to call themselves) seizing power once the ill effects of the socialist policies are seen. It won't be a power exchange of respect and discourse but one that will likely boarder on violence.

We have a situation where it seems increasingly unlikely the old will be allowed to retire coupled with bleak prospects for employment for the young.

What did we decide to do with all this going on? We flooded the first world with at best near useless unskilled labor and at worst violent war criminals.

I see a fork in the road. One between violence that has rarely been seen in history and the other collapse of what we would recognize as the free world. It all seems a tad grim to me.

(sorry for all the edits im not used to a touch screen paired with a spellcheck)