WASHINGTON: Google is adding “fact check” tags to its news articles, introducing the feature amid a US presidential race roiled by heated disputes over the accuracy of information.

The move, announced Thursday, will allow readers on Google news applications and websites to click on links to check facts where claims have been evaluated by fact-check organizations.

The new feature is being introduced amid a war over facts between many major media outlets and Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump.

It also aims to stem the spread of “fake” news that may spread through social media.

“We’re excited to see the growth of the fact-check community and to shine a light on its efforts to divine fact from fiction, wisdom from spin,” Google news chief Richard Gingras said in a blog post.

Google News “determines whether an article might contain fact checks” using an algorithm that evaluates claims and by seeking websites “that follow the commonly accepted criteria for fact checks,” the statement said.

Bill Adair, a Duke University journalism professor and founder of the Pulitzer Prize-winning site PolitiFact, called the Google announcement “a huge step for fact-checking.”

Trump has forced fact-checkers to work overtime with a seemingly relentless stream of untruths and exaggerations about his past, and he has hit back at the media for damning revelations.

On Thursday, Trump savaged US media for reporting “outright lies” that he groped and forcibly kissed women who came forward to tell their stories to news outlets. -AFP </s> Google has started posting links to articles which fact check stories on its Google News pages.

The new feature means that, where one is available, an article providing a fact check of a story will be included amongst other links.

Google head of news Richard Gingras said in a blog post: “Google News determines whether an article might contain fact checks in part by looking for the schema.org ClaimReview markup. We also look for sites that follow the commonly accepted criteria for fact checks. Publishers who create fact-checks and would like to see it appear with the ‘Fact check’ tag should use that markup in fact-check articles. For more information, head on over to our help center.”

In the UK Google has already begun linking to fact check articles produced by the group Full Fact. </s> Google built its reputation by helping people sift through a deluge of information. Now it’s trying to help them find the facts.

Just in time for Wednesday’s final presidential debate, Google News will begin giving fact-check-style articles — the kind that aim to validate or debunk statements made by a candidate or elected official — a specific label, with similar ones highlighting in-depth stories or local coverage of major events.

It’s a move that could help ensure Google News remains a vital resource for political news — but one that could also expose the tech giant to allegations of partisan bias.

Earlier this year, Facebook found itself mired in controversy when tech news site Gizmodo reported that former contractors who worked on the social network’s “trending topics” feature suppressed stories about conservative topics and from conservative outlets.

Advertisement

No one accuses Google of bias when its search engine ranks news articles based on their relevancy to a user’s query. So it’s possible the Mountain View, Calif., firm won’t face scrutiny when it applies a new filter to emphasize fact checks, said Robert Hernandez, a digital journalism professor at USC.

“They have always, through SEO [search engine optimization] given the ability to have the cream rise to the top,” he said.

But Google may take criticism based on the publishers it deems eligible for its fact-check label.

To qualify, stories must have easily identifiable claims and conclusions, and the analysis must be “transparent about sources and methods, with citations and references to primary sources,” according to Google. Headlines must indicate the story is a fact check and the code underlying the web page must include specific programming language so Google’s algorithm can find it.

Advertisement

But there is some element of human judgment — Google says the organization publishing the story must be nonpartisan with “transparent funding and affiliations” and can’t target one person or entity in its fact checks.

Such rules would disqualify campaign-run fact checks, like the ones Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton has touted at debates.

In question, though, are media-run fact checks. A Google spokeswoman said newspapers like the Los Angeles Times could use the fact-check tag. But when asked whether conservative news site Breitbart News or progressive publication Mother Jones would be eligible, she declined to comment and referred back to the company’s guidelines.

If Google isn’t consistent in the way it enforces its rules, it could pose a problem, said Finn Brunton, assistant professor of media, culture, and communication at NYU.

“It’s a brilliant program, but at its heart, it’s a program that has to rely, at least in some degree, on people making those calls,” Brunton said.

If sites don’t meet the company’s criteria and try to obtain the fact-check tag anyway, Google said it could ignore the coding language or remove the site from Google News.

Google’s algorithm puts the burden of proof on publishers, making the company less likely to run into allegations of bias than Facebook, which at first relied on an editorial staff, said Susan Bidel, a senior analyst at Forrester who covers digital media.

“They’re not picking a side,” she said. “They’re saying this publisher is adhering to this set of guidelines or they’re not. If they’re not, then they won’t have the tag.”

Advertisement

But algorithms aren’t infallible. After the controversy about Facebook’s “trending topics” feature, the Menlo Park, Calif., social media giant said it transitioned to a more “algorithmically driven process” that would allow for more topics to be covered. Then hoaxes began surfacing on the feature, including a conspiracy theory about the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

With its expertise in search, Google is well-positioned to spotlight the best content, Hernandez said.

“With a lot of misinformation, we turn to diverse sources to get informed,” he said. “Google is one hell of a player in that space.”

The sheer amount of information, both true and false, on the Internet could make Google’s new label useful and effective, Brunton said.

Google and Facebook “set out to organize and make available the world’s information … and the way in which they’ve done that has transformed them into de facto news organizations,” he said.

samantha.masunaga@latimes.com

For more business news, follow me @smasunaga </s> San Francisco, Feb 2 (IANS) Two leading fact-checking agencies have ended their partnerships with Facebook, striking a significant blow to the network’s efforts to fight fake news, media reports said.

The social network had paid the Associated Press and Snopes to combat its misinformation crisis. But both confirmed they stopped checking articles at the end of 2018, and will not renew their contracts, the BBC reported.

The Associated Press confirmed to TechCrunch that it was “not currently doing fact-checking work for Facebook”.

An AP spokesperson told the BBC: “AP constantly evaluates how to best deploy its fact-checking resources, and that includes ongoing conversations with Facebook about opportunities to do important fact-checking work on its platform.”

The AP representative contacted TechCrunch to say that although it was not doing fact checking work for the program, it was not leaving it altogether.

Snopes, the popular myth-busting website, has said it was ending its partnership with Facebook as part of a “difficult, but necessary change”.

A Snopes statement on Friday said it was “evaluating the ramifications and costs of providing third-party fact-checking services” and wants the efforts to be “a net positive for our online community, publication, and staff”, the Guardian reported.

Late last year, the Guardian had published a report that suggested fact-checking firms were frustrated by Facebook’s lack of transparency.

The article had quoted former Snopes managing editor Brooke Binkowski as saying: “They’ve essentially used us for crisis PR. They’re not taking anything seriously. They are more interested in making themselves look good and passing the buck They clearly don’t care.”

Facebook had disputed the report, saying it had “several inaccuracies”.

Speaking about the pull out by the key fact checkers, Binkowski said she felt Facebook was too controlling over the fact-checking companies.

“Facebook can’t handle any kind of pushback, any kind of public criticism,” she told the BBC, adding that she felt the fact-checking programme at Facebook had been “mishandled”.

Facebook has worked with two other fact-checking agencies in the US. One, Politifact, told the BBC it intended to continue working with Facebook in 2019. The other, Factcheck,org, did not respond to requests for comment at the time of publication.

Snopes said it needed to “determine with certainty that our efforts to aid any particular platform are a net positive for our online community, publication and staff”.

The site’s founder David Mikkelson, and head of operations Vinny Green, said in a blog post that the firm did not rule out working with Facebook in future.

“We hope to keep an open dialogue going with Facebook to discuss approaches to combating misinformation that are beneficial to platforms, fact-checking organisations and the user community alike,” the company said.

The blog post acknowledged that choosing not to renew its work with Facebook would have financial repercussions for the company.

In 2017, Facebook paid Snopes $100,000 for its work. Snopes has not yet released its financial disclosures for 2018.

“Forgoing an economic opportunity is not a decision that we or any other journalistic enterprise can take lightly in the current publishing landscape,” the company said.

Facebook said it was committed to fighting fake news and said it would expand its efforts in 2019.

“We are committed to fighting this through many tactics, and the work that third-party fact-checkers do is a valued and important piece of this effort.

“We have strong relationships with 34 fact-checking partners around the world who fact-check content in 16 languages, and we plan to expand the programme this year by adding new partners and languages.”

Facebook’s fact checking collaboration began after the 2016 US presidential poll led to significant concerns about propaganda and false news polluting the site.

It has since experimented with different tools to stop the spread of misinformation, including limiting the reach of articles debunked by journalist partners.

Studies and analyses of the initiative have repeatedly raised questions about whether the partnership was making a difference, and Facebook has refused to release meaningful data, the Guardian said. </s> A Snopes statement said it was "evaluating the ramifications and costs of providing third-party fact-checking services," and wants the efforts to be "a net positive for our online community, publication, and staff."

The statement did not elaborate but Snopes vice president Vinny Green told the media education group Poynter the partnership was excessively labor intensive, requiring manual updates to fact checks by its staff of 16.

"With a manual system and a closed system, it's impossible to keep on top of that stuff," Green told Poynter.

Green posted Snopes' statement on Twitter later commenting: "A difficult, but necessary change for Snopes in 2019."

Snopes said it agreed to partner with Facebook "without financial benefit to ourselves," but added that it faces increasing financial difficulties.

"Just as we believe credible and reliable content creators deserve to be paid for their work, we believe that fact-checkers should be compensated commensurately for the valuable services they provide to platforms," the statement said.

Snopes partnered with Facebook in 2016 on fact-checking and has been one of many global organizations that have agreements with the social network to help it fight misinformation.

Facebook said in a statement: "We value the work that Snopes has done, and respect their decision as an independent business."

The California-based social network added: "We are committed to fighting this through many tactics, and the work that third-party fact-checkers do is a valued and important piece of this effort.

"We have strong relationships with 34 fact-checking partners around the world who fact-check content in 16 languages, and we plan to expand the program this year by adding new partners and languages."

Snopes, which claims to the oldest internet fact-checking operation, was founded in 1994 as Urban Legends Reference Pages.

Facebook ramped up an effort on fact-checking after being accused of disseminating misinformation during the 2016 US election.

It uses artificial intelligence to flag questionable content and then sends any dubious posts to the independent fact-checkers.

Depending on the determination by those fact-checkers, Facebook may demote a post or add a message indicating it had been verified.

In the United States, Facebook has been working with FactCheck.org and PolitiFact in addition to Snopes. Facebook buys fact-checking content from AFP in over 14 countries.

Explore further: Fact-checking site Snopes pleads for help to stay alive </s> GOOGLE is shutting down the consumer version of its online social network after fixing a bug that exposed private data in as many as 500,000 accounts.

The US internet giant said it will "sunset" the Google+ social network for consumers that failed to gain meaningful traction after being launched in 2011 as a challenge to Facebook.

A Google spokesperson cited "significant challenges in creating and maintaining a successful Google+ that meets consumers' expectations" along with "very low usage" as the reasons for the move.

In March, a security audit revealed a software bug that gave third-party apps access to Google+ private profile data people meant to share only with friends.

Google said it was unable to confirm which accounts were affected by the bug, but an analysis indicated it could have been as many as 500,000 Google+ accounts.

"We found no evidence that any developer was aware of this bug, or abusing the API, and we found no evidence that any profile data was misused," Google said in a blog post.

It was referring to application programming interface software for the social network.

The data involved was limited to optional profile fields, including name, age, gender, occupation and email address, Google said.

Information that could be accessed did not include posts, messages or telephone numbers, a spokesperson said.

Google did not specify how long the software flaw existed, or why it waited to disclose it.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Google executives opted against notifying users earlier because of concerns it would catch the attention of regulators and draw comparisons to a data privacy scandal at Facebook.

Earlier this year, Facebook acknowledged that tens of millions of users had personal data hijacked by Cambridge Analytica, a political firm working for Donald Trump in 2016.

"Every year, we send millions of notifications to users about privacy and security bugs and issues," a Google spokesman told AFP.

"Whenever user data may have been affected, we go beyond our legal requirements and apply several criteria focused on our users in determining whether to provide notice." The company said it determined its course of action based on the data involved in the breach, lack of evidence of misuse and challenges in accurately determining which users to inform.

Google will wind down Google+ during the coming 10 months to allow people time to download pictures, videos or other data they want from their accounts.

Meanwhile, Google planned to add new workplace-oriented features to enhance the appeal of Google+ as a "secure corporate social network" to be used inside business operations.

"We have many enterprise customers who are finding great value in using Google+ within their companies," the internet firm said.

"Our review showed that Google+ is better suited as an enterprise product where co-workers can engage in internal discussions."

As a result of the security audit, Google plans to allow users to more tightly control what data is available to applications that synch with Google accounts or its free Gmail email service.

"Going forward, consumers will get more fine-grained control over what account data they choose to share with each app," Google said.

Applications tailored to augment Gmail will also face new rules regarding data handling and be subject to security assessments, according to the company.

Applications for use on Android-powered smartphones that seek phone or SMS data will need to conform to stricter rules when it comes to calls or text messaging, Google said. </s> Twitter is the latest online company to support a proposed law to regulate political ads amid growing public pressure after revelations of Russian meddling in the 2016 US elections.

The social media company announced on its public policy Twitter feed Tuesday that it will follow Facebook in supporting the Honest Ads Act, a Senate bill that would require tech companies to disclose how political ads are targeted and how much they cost. The bipartisan bill is sponsored by senators Amy Klobuchar, a Democrat from Minnesota; Mark Warner, a Democrat from Virginia; and John McCain, a Republican from Arizona.

"Twitter is pleased to support the Honest Ads Act," the company said in a tweet. "Back in the fall we indicated we supported proposals to increase transparency in political ads."

In a followup tweet, the company said it's moving forward on providing transparency for online ads. "We believe the Honest Ads Act provides an appropriate framework for such ads and look forward to working with bill sponsors and others to continue to refine and advance this important proposal."

Warner applauded Twitter's public support, and urged Google to do the same. "Huge step forward for the #HonestAds Act. I hope @Google will soon join @Facebook and @Twitter in supporting this bipartisan bill to bring accountability and transparency to online political ads," Warner said in a tweet.

Google has not responded to requests for comment.

The legislation, which would require online companies to adhere to the same disclosure rules as those governing television and radio ads, was drafted after federal law enforcement and US intelligence services disclosed that Russian trolls abused Twitter, Facebook and other online platforms to stir up controversy and split the American electorate during the 2016 US presidential campaign.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg on Friday said he supports political advertising regulation.

"Election interference is a problem that's bigger than any one platform, and that's why we support the Honest Ads Act," he said in a Facebook post. "This will help raise the bar for all political advertising online."

Zuckerberg is scheduled to testify at Congressional hearings Tuesday and Wednesday, where he'll be discussing online privacy and data protection. Facebook has been engulfed in controversy since it was made public that Cambridge Analytica, a political consultancy with ties to the Trump presidential campaign, harvested data on up to 87 million Facebook users without their permission.

Tech Enabled: CNET chronicles tech's role in providing new kinds of accessibility.

Blockchain Decoded: CNET looks at the tech powering bitcoin -- and soon, too, a myriad of services that will change your life. </s> Google has responded to a bug in its Google+ service by ending the service and adding several privacy changes.

However, one report said that when the tech giant first realized in March that account information of 500,000 users was potentially compromised, it wanted to keep mum for fear of government action.

Google put a brave face on the developments Monday when it announced the issue in a blog post.

Private information such as a user’s name, email address, occupation, gender and age could have been vulnerable, Google admitted.

“We ran a detailed analysis over the two weeks prior to patching the bug, and from that analysis, the Profiles of up to 500,000 Google+ accounts were potentially affected. Our analysis showed that up to 438 applications may have used this API,” the post said, adding that Google found no evidence any private information was misused.

The blog post implied this was just part of the routine battle for privacy that is part of the online world.

“Every year, we send millions of notifications to users about privacy and security bugs and issues,” the blog post said. “Whenever user data may have been affected, we go beyond our legal requirements and apply several criteria focused on our users in determining whether to provide notice.”

But while Google was patting itself on the back, The Wall Street Journal reported that the company wanted to keep the breach quiet to avoid the incident leading to government action in response.

The breach was discovered in March, and spanned three years. The Journal reported that its reporters were shown a memo from Google’s legal and policy staff warning against disclosing what had happened because it would trigger “immediate regulatory interest.”

Revealing the incident would likely result “in us coming into the spotlight alongside or even instead of Facebook despite having stayed under the radar throughout the Cambridge Analytica scandal,” the memo said.

Disclosure “almost guarantees Sundar will testify before Congress,” referring to Google CEO Sundar Pichai.

The Journal reported that a Google spokesperson explained the decision not to disclose the breach initially.

Google considered “whether we could accurately identify the users to inform, whether there was any evidence of misuse, and whether there were any actions a developer or user could take in response,” the spokesperson said. “None of these thresholds were met here.”

However, The Washington Post reported that based on the type of personal information that was available, “Some of that qualifies as legally protected personally identifiable information, and its exposure could trigger scrutiny from federal and state regulators.”

RELATED: Facebook Wants People To Invite Its Cameras Into Their Homes

The lack of disclosure could still be trouble for Google, said Al Saikali, a lawyer with Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP, who said class action lawsuits could be possible.

“The story here that the plaintiffs will tell is that Google knew something here and hid it. That by itself is enough to make the lawyers salivate,” he said.

Google said that its Google+ social service failed to attract consumers, noting that 90 percent of Google+ user sessions last fewer than 5 seconds. Google+ will fade away after 10 months, the company said.

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards. </s> Snopes, a fact-checking organization, announced on Friday its decision to end its partnership with Facebook, which has been ramping its efforts to curb misinformation on its services since the 2016 U.S. election.

Facebook and Snopes had been working together since December 2016 to fact check content on the social network. The company in 2017 paid Snopes as much as $100,000 for the work, according to Snopes.

"At this time we are evaluating the ramifications and costs of providing third-party fact-checking services, and we want to determine with certainty that our efforts to aid any particular platform are a net positive for our online community, publication, and staff," Snopes said in a statement.

Snopes said it has not closed the door on working with the company again, but it encouraged Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg to meet "with fact-checkers as part of his recently announced series of public discussions" in 2019.

The partnership is ending weeks after a report by The Guardian, in which multiple former Snopes employees criticized Facebook's efforts to stop fake content on its services.

"They've essentially used us for crisis PR," one former employee told The Guardian.

"Misinformation is an ever-evolving problem that we're committed to fighting globally, and the work that third-party fact-checkers do to help review content on Facebook is a valued and important piece of this effort," Facebook said in a blog post in December. At the time, the company said it had 35 fact-checking partners around the world.

A Facebook spokesperson said in a statement to CNBC that the company still has 34 other organizations it works with to fact check news on the site.

"We value the work that Snopes has done, and respect their decision as an independent business," the spokesperson said. "Fighting misinformation takes a multi-pronged approach from across the industry. We are committed to fighting this through many tactics, and the work that third-party fact-checkers do is a valued and important piece of this effort. We have strong relationships with 34 fact-checking partners around the world who fact-check content in 16 languages, and we plan to expand the program this year by adding new partners and languages."

WATCH: Facebook, Snapchat and TikTok have a massive underage user problem — here's why it matters
Google introduces a so-called "fact checking" feature on its news aggregate service to combat alleged political bias.