Google continues to refine it's service.
 

Google and Facebook Take Aim at Fake-News Sites.

Google got to the top and stayed there by giving the best deal they could to surfers.

Yow will this reflect your business?

Long term I suspect most bloggers relying on Google and webmastering will have to find a new job.

Thank God, those fuckers are causing so much confusion, my nephew thinks 2Pac is actually in Aruba...

I guess that's bad news for CNN. :1orglaugh

it's "its"

Couldn't read the whole story...

but more interestingly to me how do they define a fake news site?

To me if a blog have readers and posts unique valuable views, then what is the problem...

So are they blocking all government run websites then?

If they want real news and not just propaganda and lies they should.

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

It's code word for marginalizing alternative news media.
They want the "sheeple" to get their news only from the mainstream media.
:1orglaugh

Yes, that is an interesting point. I bet the sites with the poor backlink profiles...

Facebook, Google bar fake-news sites from their ad networks - MarketWatch

Facebook, Google To Crack Hard On Fake News Websites | Special Report News Journal,Stocks News

This is about barring deceptive Facebook ads for fake news -- clickbait for pages with Adsense on them. Intent to deceive for monetary gain.

It's not about banning CNN or Breitbart -- news media you don't agree with.

Define: False reports of facts -- not opinions.

If I advertise that "the DJI lost 3,000 points today" and then have a page selling prepper supplies with Adsense on it < this would be one outrageous example.

Comes of as a very credible move since WikiLeaks proved Google was for example recently involved with "profiling" voters for the HRC camp while 94 pct. of MSM was in HRC's campaign pocket.

Where does one draw the line what is fake or what not?
Since we now know that "official" is no longer a viable information.

https://twitter.com/wikileaks

Perhaps it will at least help to initiate a discussion about what is even considered "journalism" today.

Ok Carlos -- wikileaks and infowars are factual news sources LMAO

If you put a pile of shit in a bag and tie it with a red ribbon -- it's still a bag of shit.

Nobody is banning political opinion. I gave an example above.

Not sure what you're trying to accomplish by the InfoWars mention.

Is a news source that releases actual original documents a factual news? Or not even that?

I'm afraid your (non-)argumentation holds no ground.

The problem is whether or not the surfers like it.

We've all searched for something and landed on useless sites. some because they don't do it quite as we want and others because they use keywords to get traffic to make people click on links that open ads.

Your blog posts might tick the boxes for Google, but Google is more interested in it ticking surfers boxes. This it might judge by how fast surfers return. The future is for those that satisfy surfers needs.

It's LOL