Tartarin wrote:Not websites, Monger. Their decisions about which news to put on the front page and which not.
On the bottom of the google news page it says the following:
"The selection and placement of stories on this page were determined automatically by a computer program."
Google will obviously try to make their news ranking algorithim as good as possible, but that's not in any way something easy to pull off due to the sheer number of news sources google draws from & many other reasons. The end result is not determined by google editors.
Got a bridge to sell you, Monger?
I'm not sure what you mean by that.
Well, Tartarin, it's similar, I think, but definately not as ..., well, not the same.
Just in case you missed this about British journalism
How the Iraq row spiralled
(And then see the latest via the links on the right side.)
There's no mystery to Google's ranking system; they even have a page which explains exactly how they do it:
HOW GOOGLE WORKS
Heehee! I luv that page, timber!
Ha! I assumed it was straightforward, but then clicked on it after Monger's comment. Funny!!
with the first one - you can just type in destruction and get to the same page from 'lucky' - not quite as effective as searching for 'weapons of mass destruction', but interesting
Clicked on "bomb" link and goat a really good laugh -- a link to "Dr. Strangelove" at Amazon in England (gives you a hint where this prank originated.)
And another link takes you to a book of poetry by Rumsfeld, and other delights!
Love that Strangelove film - "We'll meet again...."
AGree with you about Strangelove, Dlowan! Reminds me to put it on my "I want that video!" list.
Tartarin, I hear a lot of this kind of thing about google, google news & such, so I'd like to take this chance to clear up the issue a little better. Although I think timberlanko's PigeonRank link makes a lot of sense
, here's the official explanation from Google:
About Google News
Google News FAQ wrote:.. Google News is highly unusual in that it offers a news service compiled solely by computer algorithms without human intervention. While the sources of the news vary in perspective and editorial approach, their selection for inclusion is done without regard to political viewpoint or ideology. While this may lead to some occasionally unusual and contradictory groupings, it is exactly this variety that makes Google News a valuable source of information on the important issues of the day.
...
Who edits the Google News homepage? One of the headlines is totally out of whack.
The headlines that appear on Google news are selected entirely by computer algorithms, based on how and where the stories appear elsewhere on the web. There are no human editors at Google selecting or grouping the headlines and no individual decides which stories get top placement. This occasionally results in some articles appearing to be out of context.
I was sent this by my older daughter, who is newly arrived at an interest in politics and an intense, visceral distate for Bush (see - not even a mother like me can bring all her chicks into the fold early!), and she was sent it by a friend I had always assumed was quite conservative (so I'm not as smart as I thought I was).
Anyway, the links show quite clearly its British origin, and that in itself is interesting. Does this mean things are not going well for Tony Blair?
I loved it.
It's been around for quite a while now, so I don't think it necessarily reflects how Tony Blair is being viewed now. I first saw it a couple of months ago. (??) Not sure about when, but it was for sure more than a month ago.
Well, Monger, let's vote those darn algorithms out next time around!
(Sorry. I'm a skeptic! Do you believe in non-paper votes too? PS -- We're not talking about headlines -- it's what a news search brings up that's problematical.)
This site was created by Alexander Cox (inspired by an article in 'The Guardian') on February 12, 2003. In the first few days, more than 800,000 persons visited this site. Then, the site was linked by newspapers and a tv-station-homepage.
Today (06.07.03) the number increased to 4.3 million visitors/day.
Meanwhile, it is link to 445 similar sites.
(source: Spiegel online)
It has been send around in H-net-groups since early March.
Tartarin,
People are just exploiting the Google algo, anyone can do it if they want to sped the time on it. It's called a Google bomb and google hates them but to change it would mean an editorial alteration of their SERPs.
They are right to leave it alone.
If you don't like a Google bomb create a counter Google bomb.
