When anyone goes to google news, which millions of people do everyday, they get a huge list of links to relevant news stories. However many people are suggesting that google should edit the news so that people get more important news. In Clair Millers article Should Google Tweak the News We Consume? she raises the point that google could decide which kind of news people will read every day. She mentions that many people followed the Casey Anthony trial when they should be reading about life and death situations in Africa.
This article defiantly raises an interesting point. Since google basically decides what millions of people read everyday do they have an obligation to make people read important news. If they were to alter the algorithm used so that it put world news over entertainment then many people would read these articles and be more worldly. I for one think that they should, when I go to google I am always drawn to the cool or funny articles and ignore the important ones. However if there was only important ones I would read those. Google however would lose business doing this so it is not likely to happen. I think that google being the multi billion dollar organization it is could afford to lose some money to make the world a more knowledgeable place.
Hi Michael! I really agree that Google should be more selective with their articles. It is extremely important to inform consumers with news happening all around the world. My attention is also pulled towards cool or funny articles but when I see an important article as well I keep in mind to read it next.
Hey Michael, I have also noticed how our priorities get turned upside down as we are attracted to the fun and interesting articles about games or celebrity gossip as opposed to serious social issues. I think Clair Millers brings up a good point. However, if this policy is implemented, there is the potential for misuse as Google will essentially have the power to decide what is important and what we ‘should’ read.
Hi Michael,
I think the opposite. I believe that if google were to start censoring some of the “fun” articles and bringing forth more “important articles” they will no longer be a full search engine. I use google to find anything in the world, if some things were blocked, that would defy the point. I think
Hi Michael! I agree that Google should prioritize its news differently so that more important news comes up first. I think that the entertainment articles could still be there for when people really want to read them but they should be at the bottom of the page or in a different section so that people are presented with stories that are actually relevant to the world first.
I do not agree that the current algorithm used to determine the popularity of the site and therefore where it appears should be altered. In fact it is completely perfect. WIth millions of users on google everyday, the news articles that appear first are shifted to what is popular nowadays. Although one may argue that what is popular may not be what is important in the world, google cannot begin to handpick articles to display. that would cause too much controversy including bias based decisions.
I think this is a great point. We mistake our interest in entertainment and recreational activities as important. As a consequence, we regard the truly important matters as irrelevant. I think this has a lot to do to our attachment to certain things. If Google were to focus on important worldly news rather than entertainment it would definitely broaden the population’s knowledge of the world. For example, while wikipedia is a poor research source it can be read in recreational time. Then clocking on numerous other links, I’ve learned a number of new things. The knowledge is available, we just need to be better exposed to it.
a lot of people definitely focus on things that have little significance so google should try to put important news up for people to see