Betting clicking on any lands you on a Google AMP cached page too. So they can control the page, add the AMP banner, carousel widget, etc.
Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
111–120 of 189 posts
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Was there? Because last I checked all that these so called 'reputable' sources of news seem to put out is biased garbage full of misleading data and often blatant lies. The inculcation of this sentiment is precisely the effect I'm referring to. The waters have become so muddied with nonsense that no one can tell right from wrong anymore. And thus, actual news organizations with trained reporters and fact checkers an…
You've clearly not seen the UK press. The Daily Mail has been around for decades, and has quality standards roughly on par with Fox News at best. The tabloids have spent years posting any old speculation they can find and sometimes even hacking people's phones for information. And the more respectable papers have generally had their own problems with reporting standards. The likes of the Guardian and the Telegraph sh…
Ah, the UK press. How did that happen? Why do the British like that sort of thing?
And I'd also add that the Greek press is also garbage. They don't turn a profit at all and are simply propaganda for their owner's point of view. Their owners usually being family-owned conglomerates. It's as if the Kochs started their own newspaper. I get the impression this is actually pretty common in many countries, particularly eastern European ones.
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#113The bit about adding it to the website seems like a misinterpretation/over-extrapolation of something said in a briefing about it, specifically that the news feed would be brought to mobile web browsers 'in some form' (see quotes below). That's pretty different from "the feed is definitely being attached to google.com", and also seems to entirely exclude the idea of it showing up on desktop google.com as well.
(disclaimer: I work at google, but I know nothing much about this in particular)
Fortune: > "In addition to putting Google Feed on mobile apps, the company is looking at attaching it to web browsers in some form, Shashi Thakur, a second Google vice president for engineering, said during the briefing." http://fortune.com/2017/07/19/google-feed-compete-facebook-n...
Indian Express: "The company is looking to bring it to mobile web browsers, although it didn’t say when. “It should have roughly the same behavior” as a news feed, Thakur said." http://indianexpress.com/article/technology/tech-news-techno...
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree; the right-wing press lacks high quality journalists. Journalists seem to happen to lean left a whole lot more.
If 90% of the press is left leaning, no surprise that 90% of journalists lean left, high and low quality alike.
Um, no, that's not the reason. The people that choose to become journalists often do it for idealistic reasons. They want to enlighten the public about issues they care about. Palestine, for example. Right-wing people generally don't have that many issues they want to tell people about. Everybody already knows how high their taxes are, no journalism needed.
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Actual news organizations" don't exist in the sense we'd like. They're all agenda driven and constantly lie by omission. Breitbart is shamelessly pro-Trump. They will publish stories that others won't but also won't publish anything counter to their narrative. The Guardian, which someone else mentioned, is massively left-leaning and is also very selective about what they cover. Their articles are often poorly though…
Reuters maybe? They actively try for neutral coverage. edit: But yeah, organizations of people with biases can't be perfectly neutral
Ideally, we'd all read something like Reuters or AP* . The problem is that because there isn't any bias, the stories tend to be quite dry. While that's great for impartiality, people get bored reading it. The BBC has a problem where they have to be impartial and non-accusatory, so articles are plagued with quote marks (e.g "The minister said he was 'shocked' ").
The majority of people read the papers because they want to read something sensationalist from their point of view.
* Actually what everyone should do is read a spectrum of papers from left to right wing. This avoids the bias problem because it becomes immediately obvious and it forces you to think about what the real story might be.
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#116The "newsfeed" pattern is one of the worst ideas humanity has ever had. Never has it been so easy to manipulate public opinion at will. 10 years ago there was a such thing as standards in journalism. Now anypoliticalblog.com's headline has been promoted to the equal status of an actual news organisation by means of the implicit legitimacy of appearing in a news feed. This insanity has reached a crescendo with the off…
"Actual news organizations" don't exist in the sense we'd like. They're all agenda driven and constantly lie by omission. Breitbart is shamelessly pro-Trump. They will publish stories that others won't but also won't publish anything counter to their narrative. The Guardian, which someone else mentioned, is massively left-leaning and is also very selective about what they cover. Their articles are often poorly though…
This is false equivalence.
It's comforting to think that Breitbart and The Guardian are equally biased, and if you average them together, you get the truth.
But I'd challenge you to find headlines on The Guardian that match Breitbart stories like these:
"Pro-Nazi Roots of Planned Parenthood Revealed"
"The Solution to Online Harassment is Simple: Women Should Log Off"
"Huma Abedin Most Likely a Saudi Spy With Deep Inarguable Connections to Global Terrorist Entity"
"Birth Control Makes Women Unattractive and Crazy"
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've clearly not seen the UK press. The Daily Mail has been around for decades, and has quality standards roughly on par with Fox News at best. The tabloids have spent years posting any old speculation they can find and sometimes even hacking people's phones for information. And the more respectable papers have generally had their own problems with reporting standards. The likes of the Guardian and the Telegraph sh…
Ah, the UK press. How did that happen? Why do the British like that sort of thing? And I'd also add that the Greek press is also garbage. They don't turn a profit at all and are simply propaganda for their owner's point of view. Their owners usually being family-owned conglomerates. It's as if the Kochs started their own newspaper. I get the impression this is actually pretty common in many countries, particularly ea…
South America too
I find LeMondediplomatique (in all it's countries regions) to be a light in the darkness of propaganda. Check it out
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#118This must mean that Yahoo and the other search engines that followed the "portal" design pattern which Google was a welcome alternative to are so far in the past that they're about to sleepwalk into the same design mistakes.
Looks like Duckduckgo has an opening, don't waste it.
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
Equating Breitbart and the Guardian shows your bias I'm afraid. Something like the Huffington Post would have been a better comparison.
I didn't really equate them, I just used as them as examples since they'd both already been mentioned. Also, don't you think that suggesting Breitbart is worse than the Guardian might point to your own bias? The Guardian is designed to look less like a tabloid, which gives the appearance of it being more honest - but is it really a less biased source of news? It's very hard to judge such things. I've been reading the…
So because you don't like what they write, they're biased?
Re: Google to add 'news feed' to website and app
#120It's hard to believe this is going to happen to google.com Google is, if nothing else, obsessed with metrics; unless they'd A/B/... tested this to death , there is zero chance they'll roll it out to their homepage. I can't believe it, and it's not mentioned anywhere on their blog post. To be fair, most people probably search from the chrome toolbar now, but even so, I imagine at most, we'll see a staged roll out to a…
Being obsessed with metrics is the exact reason something like this would go through.
All companies that design to metrics instead of vision always ship the worst UI/UX crimes. This is the ideology we have to thank for things like the lightbox sign up forms that block or lock out content if you try to browse without an account on FB/Pintrest etc.
You're assuming the metric Google is designing for is still how fast a user gets what they want off site. What if the metric they're designing for is how long someone spends in the Google ecosystem?