#1
  1. No Profile Picture
    Newbie
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    0

    Google and the defamation/ fake reporting websites question.


    Curious, if anyone is the know. For fifteen years or so Google has given great seo page 1 results to many of the big defamation/ extortion (complaint) websites. In the era of fake news, does anyone know why they continue to do this? Thousands of the pages on these sites are fake obvious erroneous reporting yet they continue to get great page one results. Will this just continue on indefinitely?
  2. #2
  3. Dinosaur
    SEO Chat High Scholar (3500 - 3999 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,970
    Rep Power
    6518
    Google generally dont take a stance on content, its a algorithmic ranking so providing they do their SEO better than others then they will rank. Google only tend to take these sites out if there is legal or moral reasons to do so. For example I would imagine child porn is difficult to find on google as they will taken a moral standing on that even if it is legal in some other country. What their views are on other topics though would not play into what sites get ranked or not, they just index, they are not the internet police.
    Owner of Page Explorer the page onsite SEO checker
    Useful Tools: Site Statistics: SEM Rush | Site Crawler: Screaming Frog
  4. #3
  5. No Profile Picture
    Newbie
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    0
    Thanks Cheddars, I believe there is a moral issue here, as they are facilitating huge profits for these sites that are unethical. It's a pity they cannot take a moral issue on this. Do these pages, which so many are spammish and inaccurate have to get page one results?
  6. #4
  7. Dinosaur
    SEO Chat High Scholar (3500 - 3999 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,970
    Rep Power
    6518
    As I said its a algorithmic ranking so if they score more then yes they will rank. Its not like google look at each site and say ok this can go at position 2.
    Think of it like religion, Google may be lets say christian in their believes but a muslim site outranks a christian site for some religious phrase, is it fair that google step in and reduce the muslim site because of their own personal beliefs ?
    Its true they have been known to step in and develop algo updates aimed at groups of sites, they did this with a payday loan update a while ago, the update did not get them all but it certainly reduced their domination.

    Fake news sites have been in the press of late a lot so who knows they may target them soon, however Google try really hard to be as unbiased as possible believe or not.On the whole they tend to do a really good job and for the majority of your searches the sites on the first page are pretty good. We would all like our own sites in the top 3 but that is because we are close to them so we tend to be biased.

    Sorry if the answer is not to your liking but its just the was it is I am afraid.

    Comments on this post

    • Pierre Benneton agrees
  8. #5
  9. No Profile Picture
    Newbie
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    0
    Thanks Cheddars, appreciate that, I understand your opinion, and your articulation. That said, it would only take an afternoon for Google to figure out which handful of sites are the most egregious and change their algorithm to get the extortion websites to page 5, 6, 7 etc where they belong. It's not that hard. They have been making a conscious decision to allow these amoral sites to rise to page one for years, and it's totally contrary to their original motto : "don't be evil". Hopefully they will change. Even the famed internet legal scholar Eric Goldman has argued that sites which take money from changing adding, adjust, deleting text from their victims ( the core premise of the defamation/ extortion industry), should not achieve page one results. The child porn analogy was apt, as Google can take action if they chose to but so far have not because it's not illegal, it's only immoral and unethical, and that the bar that Google has been working with — it has to be illegal, not just immoral, unethical or evil. Very poor bar they have set.
  10. #6
  11. No Profile Picture
    Moderator
    SEO Chat Good Citizen (1000 - 1499 posts)

    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,138
    Rep Power
    2345
    Originally Posted by jenny33313
    and it's totally contrary to their original motto : "don't be evil"


    From an article >>
    https://qz.com/284548/what-google-really-means-by-dont-be-evil/

    “The famous Google mantra of ‘Don’t be evil’ is not entirely what it seems.” Those words come not from a detractor of the company but from Eric Schmidt, its executive chairman, and Jonathan Rosenberg, an advisor to Larry Page, in their new book, How Google Works.

    From the book:
    Yes, it genuinely expresses a company value and aspiration that is deeply felt by employees. But “Don’t be evil” is mainly another way to empower employees… Googlers do regularly check their moral compass when making decisions.
    But the part I like best is this....LMAO

    Don’t take my word for it. As Eric Schmidt told Wired way back in 2003, “Evil is what Sergey [Brin] says is evil.”

  12. #7
  13. Dinosaur
    SEO Chat High Scholar (3500 - 3999 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,970
    Rep Power
    6518
    You do seem to be under the impression that google should monitor the contents of each site, I honestly dont know why you think this. They simply index sites and present them in a order according to their algorithm.
    The algorithm is extremely complex so making any change to it can have very unexpected changes, I know of 1 case when they released the payday loan update, the guy ran a red letter day site, his site was also taken out by this algo tweak, so saying google should just ban these sites can take out many other sites as well.
    They do have a manual spam team who psychically look at sites and if you have concerns about a site you can report it to that team, Afraid I dont have the link to hand. But this is a site by site basis and they will review a site but generally they wont take its contents and say is this a true fact or false unless there is some intent to harm the user.

    There are many sites out there I find offensive but I dont expect google to ban them as that goes against the freedom of speech. The day a website has to be inspected before its allowed to publish will be the day the internet has died.
  14. #8
  15. No Profile Picture
    Newbie
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    0
    Great post Chedders and Know One. Thanks, good link.

    Chedders. Google, is was just announced yesterday is partnering with Facebook to monitor Fake news. These sites, are the Godfather of fake news or reviews/ complaints. Many suggest, not even indexing them. I'm not saying don't index them or ban them, I'm saying do they have to achieve page one results for the thousands of pages of which are completely inaccurate, non filtered whatsoever, and causing harm to people and business — as well as taking money from the victims of the defaming pages. .... which even the fake sites don't do. Their manual team Matt Cutts and crew, (he posted on this years ago), have made a conscious decision, to not just not de-index or ban the extortion sites, but actually continue to deliver page 1 results (instead of page 7 or 8 which they could easily tweek the algorithm), because what they are doing is perfectly legal (in the US), albeit immoral and unethical. Not to mention without the bad ethics, those pages don't deserve page one results just based on their inaccuracies and unreliably information the sites consistently deliver.
  16. #9
  17. Dinosaur
    SEO Chat High Scholar (3500 - 3999 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,970
    Rep Power
    6518
    It may sound like I am supporting fake news sites, I would like to say I am definitely not and I do agree with you they are a pain in the ar^$. But in order to take down these pages then each bit of news needs to be verified, There simply is no method for doing this and if pages had to be vetted prior to going live would kill the net stone dead.

    As I keep saying though google is just an index, nothing more nothing less, it displays results based on a users question, it cannot make judgement on the contents other than from a technical point of view. They dont publish or host the content either so it is down to each country to determine if content is legal or not and if proved not then the servers are often taken down.

    The whole what should be allowed and what should not be allowed on the net is a debate everyone has a view on depending on their background or beliefs but in all honesty if you allow users to decide they will often gravitate to the better sites anyway.

    For news for example I tend to read the BBC here in the UK, They may not be perfect but I tend to trust them on reporting on the whole fairly accurate information even if they sometimes show a bit of bias.
  18. #10
  19. Not An Expert
    SEO Chat Hero (2000 - 2499 posts)

    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    2,176
    Rep Power
    2033
    Neat discussion happening here - I'm going to move it to our Google Optimization section.
  20. #11
  21. No Profile Picture
    Newbie
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    0
    Thanks Mark.
    Cheddars, good point, yes BBC UK, is outstanding and deserves to be on page 1. They moderate the content and verify it. If there is any defamation, they work to correct it. Do scumbag/spam websites that don't verify anything, and actually encourage inflammatory defaming content, and then on top that, try to weasel money out of the victims of these sites deserve page 1 ranking?
    Funny, I did not know you are in UK, where you have recourse and good libel/ internet defamation laws and the population does not have to suffer under the section 230 rule.
  22. #12
  23. Dinosaur
    SEO Chat High Scholar (3500 - 3999 posts)

    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    3,970
    Rep Power
    6518
    The other issue you have is currently I believe there are over 1 billion websites worldwide, I would dread to think how many pages that would be but I think its more than their are people alive. Can you imagine the resources required to police everything that is out there. This is why Google needs help. I think I have found the link https://support.google.com/sites/answer/116262?hl=en so if you think you have found a fake news site, report it.
  24. #13
  25. No Profile Picture
    Newbie
    SEO Chat Explorer (0 - 99 posts)

    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Posts
    6
    Rep Power
    0
    Thanks Cheddar, well that link wont help too much, it says right there, illegal. If a site is just unethical, and extorts, money and defames the population then it cannot be reported, until Congress passes a law such as you have in the UK and most of Europe and the rest of the world. They could easily bring these sites to page 7,8,9 in seo results (not page 1, 2, and 3) but have so far made a decision not to.

Similar Threads

  1. U.S. seizes websites in fake goods crackdown (Reuters)
    By RSS_News_User in forum Technology News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Nov 29th, 2010, 01:02 PM
  2. Hackers running fake Obama websites: security firm (AFP)
    By RSS_News_User in forum Technology News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Jan 20th, 2009, 08:03 PM

IMN logo majestic logo threadwatch logo seochat tools logo