For example, as demonstrated this week, Google was criticized for listing a Holocaust denial page first in its results for a search for “did the holocaust happen,” as shown this example from the Guardian, which first reported on it: google holocaust How to handle this type of result? There have been many instinctive calls to delete it simply because it is not factually correct. But a one-time deletion of the page would not solve the problem for other searches and with other sites. This also poses another challenge. If the policy is that you simply delete things that aren't based on
fact, much of the web can become vulnerable to Google censorship. For example, would you have to remove major religious organizations because these fax number list groups are based on unassailable faith – the very essence of most of them – rather than demonstrable facts? Google needs some kind of policy to deal with the kind of “post-truth world” that many are increasingly concerned about. One of my thoughts - and others I've seen expressed -
is that potentially it could partner with third-party organizations to develop a list of particular sites that should be flagged or filtered, like Facebook's announcement this week of what he would do to fight fake news. Google already flags fact-checking sites in Google News, which it implemented last month. Filtering would be the opposite. This would penalize or reduce the risk of sites that appear to be pushing fake news showing up for popular searches. As with filtering search suggestions, no system