Why can't Google News be searched by date? It used to have that feature but they took it away. I wonder why!
[deleted]
Google News Initiative
161–170 of 195 posts
Re: Google News Initiative
#162I got fed up with Google News a year or so ago, over the echo chamber that the news site has become. It motivated me to create https://statesreport.com , with no ads and no tracking.
Are you open to creating an API for us to query for https://www.chooseholly.com ? We currently pull data from Bings API for our Discover feature. Happy to pay for usage :)
Sure! You can reach out at sgterban@gmail.com
Re: Google News Initiative
#163Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could not disagree more. I am generally pretty liberal but get news stories from Breitbart, Fox news, etc all the time in my feed. I like to read all sides so love this aspect of Google news. Heck I get negative Google stories from Google. Can't ask for more neutral.
Is there some feedback feature or something you use to get a helpful range of stories? My experience with Google News isn't so much bias or a bubble as uselessness . Source quality, comprehensiveness, and coverage depth seem totally irrelevant, like I'm just getting a feed of every news site a bunch of people clicked on recently. It's the same stuff as Facebook's trending bar, at about the same level of shallow and u…
I have used many feedback forms that Google provides. I am convinced that they completely ignore my feedback.
Re: Google News Initiative
#164I used Google News for a long time. I have since blackholed it on all of my machines. By tailoring the news articles presented to be based on the interests that Google data mined from my Google profile, it became an echo chamber even worse than Facebook. It became a very bad source of news: all of the articles were self-reinforcing each other with very very little actual diversity of sources.
The article is NOT about Google News, it’s about the Google News _Initiative_.
Re: Google News Initiative
#165Earlier quoted context omitted.
The subscription system sounds like it's one part of this initiative. And if it is indeed the "main thing" then I think we should give Google some credit for being serious with this initiative. A payments system is a boring problem but it is the one most core to news organizations' current existential problems. It's not as sexy as using NLP to categorize news archives perhaps, but it's the most important to news orgs…
I just wish they would bring back the old patron system, where I didn't see ads and some small amount of money went to the sites I visited, without a subscription. Because I want to support good journalism, wherever it is found, but there's no way I'm ever going to sign up for $3/mo for the Miami Herald to read three articles a year.
You're thinking of Google Contributor. It seems likely that these are teams working in different parts of Google.
Re: Google News Initiative
#166While this is generally a positive step by Google it will fall short in revitalizing the news industry for a simple reason. In a world of near infinite content options, most people can no longer justify having any single news subscription. A better solution is a fractional subscription model where subscriptions are tiered to one's reading needs. This is what my company http://CivikOwl.com is working on. Hope to make…
I generally agree with the model; it's a model that's been independently struck on many times now. Most directly in the hunt are Google and Flattr.
I had the same idea some time ago, but silly me, got interested in solving the technical problems of tracking visits while preserving privacy. What I should have been doing is fretting about the business side of things.
At least I got a patent out of it.
Re: Google News Initiative
#167I used Google News for a long time. I have since blackholed it on all of my machines. By tailoring the news articles presented to be based on the interests that Google data mined from my Google profile, it became an echo chamber even worse than Facebook. It became a very bad source of news: all of the articles were self-reinforcing each other with very very little actual diversity of sources.
The article is NOT about Google News, it’s about the Google News _Initiative_.
If Google didn't want the two connected in peoples' minds then Google should not have named the two so similar.
Indeed, I cannot fathom an initiative which would not tie directly into Google News, as yet another data point to profile you (the product).
Re: Google News Initiative
#168Earlier quoted context omitted.
keyword search is the very bare minimum for search
Any search at google is N mapreduce jobs away from a keyword search. In theory, having a really nice search engine for this news would be rather easy for Google (/any Googler with a few weeks of time and access to this data). This is essentially what every new employee at Google has to do in the orientation week.
[deleted]
Re: Google News Initiative
#169I don't have a problem with 'truth' per se, merely a problem with who gets to adjudicate what is true versus what is not, even if something is apparently non-true.
Rather than delete or abridge any legal content (as defined by a litany of 1st Amendment SCOTUS cases), at least in the USA, instead of deleting/modifying/filtering news content, we should do with news content what we've done with movies' rating labels for as long as we have - tag the content with a 'truth' label.
So Google News can develop a tagging system that labels news articles as "most likely" to "least likely" to be true, like a 1-10 rating. HuffPo can have its own truth ratings for the content they push. Breitbart or Infowars their own, etc.
I'll go for a system like this any day over Google or the SPLC or CNN or Snopes or whomever crowning themselves "truth" endorses, when in fact, they're mostly spinning the facts and telling a story from their own POV/context.
Re: Google News Initiative
#170Earlier quoted context omitted.
I had a similar problem. After I stopped using gmail & google search (for privacy reasons) and started using Duck Duck Go, it almost seemed random in what news it was trying to feed me because it didn't have enough data. I messed with the little sliders, banned fake news sources like HuffPost/WashPost etc, but I couldn't get it to deliver a news feed I actually wanted to consume... so... I just gave up on it. Finally…
> banned fake news sources like HuffPost/WashPost etc Is the Washington Post considered fake news by most? Do you have examples of why you think it's fake? I'm curious because I actually pay for WaPo. I occasionally pull up fox news to see another side, but while I do consider WaPo liberal leaning, it seemed at least less biased than some other sources I've seen, and I would rather know the biases I'm consuming.
WaPo isn't biased and it's definitely not "fake news".