Google Wants People In The News To Clarify News Reports

from the interesting-ideas dept

There's an old saying about the press, that whenever you're involved in a news story, you can almost guarantee that the press coverage will get the story wrong. It's amazing how true this is -- but it appears that Google News is trying to do something about it. It's launching a new service that will let those who are involved in a particular news story comment on the news coverage on Google News. That is, if there's a story about you, you'll have the opportunity to add your own perspective (or counter any points you disagree with in the news coverage) and have it shown on Google News linked to the relevant news stories. It's an interesting idea, though it has a number of hurdles to overcome. First of all, Google just set themselves up to be besieged by people who want to comment on a story who aren't actually participants (or by people pretending to be part of the story). The hassle of figuring out who's really part of the story isn't going to be easy. In fact, it seems like it would almost definitely be more costly than whatever benefit this might bring. On top of this, Danny Sullivan lays out a number of problems with this idea in the link above, starting with the fact that people already have the ability to post their own thoughts on their own sites. Wouldn't it simply make a lot more sense if Google and its magical algorithm did a better job of associating such responses to the news stories? Still, in an age where Congress still thinks the Fairness Doctrine is needed, here's yet another example of how technology is making sure that everyone has ample opportunity to get "their side" out on any particular story.
Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: google news, newspapers
Companies: google

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 9 Aug 2007 @ 4:53pm

    Re: Re: Fairnes Doctrine

    1. If there are more than two sides to a story - ten or a huundred more, they should air. If some are "ridiculous", they will be exposed as such. I'd rather give readers the opportunity to make that judgement rather than leave it up to any publisher. And there is nothing in your argument that states why nuances would have to be suppressed.If you want your argument to prevail, make a logical case with good research and writing.

    Winning your point by suppression of your opponents arguments is not good for democracy; it's the way North Korea operates.

    2. So, "forcing a news provider to think carefully before airing any opinion" because someone can reply stifles free speech?

    Are you kidding? That doesn't stifle free speech. It allows more free speech. Why should anyone with good intentions be afraid of an opposing opinion?

    3. An immense number of people do not use the internet the way you and I do. They rely on newspapers, magazines, radio and TV; and it will be that way for the foreseeable future.

    If it were so easy to publicize opinions, why would political candidates have to raise millions of dollars to run for office? Where do they spend it all? They do it so they can get their opinions out. A few of us don't have that much money; but we might have very good ideas.

    4. You seem to believe that providing more opportunitites for differing opinions to be heard is a restriction on free speech. More opportunities to state your views equals restrictions? Sorry, that doesn't compute.

    If I wanted to win an election, get people to believe the way I believe, or motivate them to carry out my wishes, I would want to limit their ability to express their opposition publicly.

    Limiting the public airing of ideas is not promoting free speech. We all can't own news outlets - even on the internet.

    With all sincere respect, your arguments are Orwellian.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.