Google News is broken

The algorithm that ranks content made some truly strange decisions about the Trump/Putin summit. What signals is Google News looking for?

Rich Gordon
Jul 17, 2018 · 3 min read

Imagine that you came back home after a busy day of work and wanted to catch up on the news about the Trump/Putin summit. This is, in fact, exactly what I did yesterday.

I knew some interesting stuff had happened, but I wanted to dive deeper — to see multiple stories and get different perspectives. Google News seemed like a good place to start.

But look what I found at the top of the “Full coverage” page for the Trump/Putin press conference:

Image for post
Image for post
Screenshot from a Mac laptop at 10:33pm Pacific time July 16 / 12:33am Central time & 1:33am Eastern time July 17

All four of these items come, directly or indirectly, from Fox News. Even worse, none of them is a factual report about the press conference — and all are commentary from the conservative end of the political spectrum, more specifically Trump sympathizers:

The fact that Google News thinks the four most important stories about the summit all come from Fox News is just stunning. Especially considering that the fallout from the press conference included harsh criticism of Trump from conservative voices like Bob Corker, Lindsey Graham and John McCain.

Look, I understand that we have a polarized political environment, and that publishing a partisan spin on the news is a reliable way for digital publishers to build an audience. One of the reasons I would go to Google News is to find different perspectives on an important story.

But my experience last night suggests that the Google News algorithm is, quite simply, broken. It is not only incapable of separating factual reporting from commentary, it can’t even provide a semblance of left/right balance on a story as polarizing as this one.

Google is not very transparent about how Google News works — here’s what they say on Google News Help.

I would speculate that there are a couple of factors that explain what I saw last night:

  • First, that the Google News algorithm is prioritizing video, or Web pages containing video (such as all four of the links I saw).
  • And second, that Google News is valuing “social signals” — how content is behaving on social media, where partisan speech drives the most shares — rather than the nature of the content (news reports vs. commentary) and/or the reliability of the news sources.

I do understand that it is hard to build algorithms that can reliably differentiate news reports from commentary, and I also understand that tech companies are reluctant to get into the business of differentiating publishers based on quality or reliability. These are hard technology problems. But while there has been plenty of attention paid to Facebook’s role in propagating misinformation, and even a fair amount of attention to the flaws in Google’s YouTube recommendation algorithm, thus far Google News seems to have escaped criticism.

Google needs to tell us more about how its Google News algorithm works — and figure out how to apply technology (or technology plus human judgment) to do a better job of ranking stories that are the focus of so much partisan spin.

I don’t think that this requires rethinking ALL of Google News — probably the majority of news coverage never enters the partisan spin machine. But for stories like the Trump/Putin summit, the Google News algorithm seems to be failing entirely.

By the way, I was so distressed about what I saw that I tweeted about it last night, specifically mentioning the Twitter accounts for Google News, the Google News Initiative and Krishna Bharat, who invented Google News. No response so far — feel free to retweet if you agree with me!

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade