The fuss has calmed down about Google’s new search program that would spit out results based on accuracy. The search algorithm, announced in early March, would display websites and news stories with the factual information at the top of the results and the falsehood-ridden sites as the cellar-dwellers.
Currently, Google puts the most read websites and news stories at the top of search results, regardless of accuracy. So, the results are the popularity contest winners. The search program would make veracity more important than popularity.
Google isn’t using the “truthing” tool currently. But when it announced the truthing research program, there was outrage from Fox News, which consistently ranks low in accuracy in university studies and at Politifact.org, Factcheck.org and other independent online truthing sites. Also howling were climate change deniers, foes of childhood vaccinations, “birthers” who insist President Obama is an African-born Muslim, and other fact-challenged interests.
Why the uproar? Because the ranking by accuracy would be bad for business. Google would route fewer readers to Fox News’ stories and the birther, climate change denier and anti-vaccination websites. Fewer visitors at the websites mean less advertising revenue.
(Didn’t their mamas tell them honesty is always the best policy?)
Alas, Google has no plans to start using the program. But I’m still having fun imagining the uproar if Google activates what comedian Stephen Colbert might call the “truthiness” tool. Envision the technical tough love for folks who have their own “special” version of the truth, since Google has scanned millions of pages from the Library of Congress, the New York Public Library, various university libraries and other behemoth fact sources into its database.
Employers might be able to fact-check job candidates’ résumés and LinkedIn pages, finding bogus credentials. Fudging on education, roles and responsibilities would knock out job candidates. Let’s call that program “Résumé Buster.” Also vanquished: those loathsome fake claims of military service.
Here in Colorado, how about a technology whiz helping skiers with a search program that compares ski area reports about fresh snow and conditions to satellite reports?
The Colorado Department of Transportation provides great information on highway jams. How about a program that uses satellites to report real-time traffic snarls on city streets, such as Colorado Boulevard or in Cherry Creek?
And how many Colorado statues and monuments will topple if the heroes that inspired them are found to be scallywags as Google’s mighty database expands?
Back in fantasyland, how about a search program that taps into data from satellite images? The program would generate tickets to the scofflaws who don’t pick up their dog’s poop in parks, spray-paint taggers, and drivers who toss trash from car windows. Be warned, midnight dumpers of toxic waste!
In the wake of the May elections, I’m wishing there’d been a truthing search that evaluated candidates’ promises and injected doses of reality. In the Denver City Council election, a few candidates pledged to improve Denver Public Schools. But the last time I looked, the Denver City Council had no control over Denver Public Schools. Imagine a search device that lit up like a pinball machine at the other impossible-to-keep promises.
Cynics yearn for a state-by-state search program that compares voting records with campaign donations. OpenSecrets. org, a non-profit website, taps into the federal database of political donations in national elections, but there is no comparable tool for each state’s elected officials, including Colorado. OpenSecrets.org lets skeptics enter the name of a congressman and then review a pie chart, by industry, of the politician’s top contributors.
True, the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United, exempting political action committees from disclosing donors’ names, spoils some of the fun.
Mayor Michael Hancock, with no significant challengers, raised over $900,000 in campaign donations. How about a computer program that compares Hancock’s next-term actions with the enterprises of major donors? Take it backward to Mayor John Hickenlooper and forward to Gov. John Hickenlooper. Were significant donations from businesses and their executives reflected in Hick’s initiatives and policies?
Up the game to Colorado’s congressional delegation. How about a search program that compares campaign donations from the health care industry to Sens. Cory Gardner and Michael Bennet, as well as Reps. Ken Buck, Diana DeGette, Jared Polis, Mike Coffman, Scott Tipton and Doug Lamborn to the lawmakers’ votes and comments on the Affordable Care Act?
Some of us have suspicions. Some of us don’t care. And how many people would vote differently in the next congressional race if they knew? Knowing which industries and their executives chipped in millions might cause a few voters to question exactly who the candidate planned to represent.
The real question is, do we want the truth? Maybe not. Fox News leads the cable news pack in . Politifact.org’s research found 61 percent of Fox News’ stories were mostly false.
Yet, a found that 35 percent of Americans say Fox is their most trusted news source.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit or check out our for how to submit by e-mail or mail.
