Google to De-rank Sites Not Deemed to Be “Truthful”
FOLLOWING the lead of Matt Stempeck (pictured), a Jewish developer of “truth determination” software, Google is planning to dramatically lower the search rankings of Web sites that express opinions not deemed “truthful” by quasi-official “fact checkers.”
Up until now, Google rankings were determined by relevance — and relevance was determined by the “crowdsourced” opinions of Webmasters, taken as a whole, who chose to link — or not to link — to a particular site. This has led to the “embarrassing” and “unacceptable” situations of high Google search rankings for National Vanguard, anthraxattacks.net, and Jew Watch, among others.
The solution: rank sites not by relevance, measured impartially by a computer algorithm, but instead by the opinions of self-appointed “experts,” many of them Jews.
(Google, by the way, does not respect your privacy. Many Web users are switching to http://startpage.com/ for both practical and ethical reasons.)
The New Scientist reports:
… Google’s search engine currently uses the number of incoming links to a web page as a proxy for quality, determining where it appears in search results. So pages that many other sites link to are ranked higher. This system has brought us the search engine as we know it today, but the downside is that websites full of misinformation can rise up the rankings, if enough people link to them.
A Google research team is adapting that model to measure the trustworthiness of a page, rather than its reputation across the web. Instead of counting incoming links, the system – which is not yet live – counts the number of incorrect facts within a page. “A source that has few false facts is considered to be trustworthy,” says the team. The score they compute for each page is its Knowledge-Based Trust score…
LazyTruth developer Matt Stempeck, now the director of civic media at Microsoft New York, wants to develop software that exports the knowledge found in fact-checking services such as Snopes, PolitiFact and FactCheck.org so that everyone has easy access to them. He says tools like LazyTruth are useful online, but challenging the erroneous beliefs underpinning that information is harder. “How do you correct people’s misconceptions? People get very defensive,” Stempeck says. “If they’re searching for the answer on Google they might be in a much more receptive state.”
* * *
Article Source: White Biocentrism