• Burgo

    Wow… very surprised at some of those results to say the least. At the very least I would have expected BBC News to be in the top 10.

    (By the by, the links to the News sources give 404 errors)

  • http://blog.vortexdna.com Kaila Colbin

    Greg,
    It is interesting to see the list of news sources Google cites, but surely their rationale for not providing the list differs from the rationale behind journalists not revealing sources: after all, the information is readily available in non-aggregated form for entrepreneurs like van Ess to compile.

    Xinhua may be considered the world’s biggest propaganda agency, but as you point out America has its own propaganda challenges. The lesson that I take from your piece is a reinforced necessity to practice discernment in news consumption.

    In reality, isn’t that a necessity for any information? If we want to be self-accountable, participating members of society, doesn’t the responsibility lie with us as individuals to know the source and potential biases of any information we receive?

    I propose that, whether we’re dealing with legal advice, medical diagnoses, or news, we need to proactively engage with content—not just swallow it blind.

    Best regards,
    Kaila Colbin

  • http://www.seo-pr.com Greg Jarboe

    Kaila, I agree that readers need to be read all news sources with a degree of skepticism, even news sources that claim to be “fair and balanced.” But, Google News has removed some sources like Playfuls.com and Google News does not allow hate content. These are editorial decisions. Google News also labels each press release so readers know that it is from a one-sided news source. So, Google News doesn’t put the burden entirely on readers to filter the sources of news. Do you think Google News should drop the “press release” label from press releases or start adding a new “official press agency” label to selected news sources?

  • http://blog.vortexdna.com Kaila Colbin

    Hi Greg,

    I think we’re saying the same thing here. The thing about Google News is that it is not actually a news source in and of itself (that I know of — feel free to prove me wrong). It is a news compiler. Therefore, it is entirely relevant to indicate that what it has compiled is, for example, a press release. We the readers are then responsible for determining how much credence we give the release, or the item from Xinhua, or the Fox ‘news’ story.

    Anyway, hats off to van Ess for making the discerning reader’s job a bit easier. If we have already done the work of determining that we trust content from Google’s top sources, then we know it’s a good place to go to get the news in one place. If we see there’s a bias in the sources, we can take results from the page with the appropriate grain of salt.

    Where do you see the division line of responsibility falling?

    All the best,
    Kaila