Google starts adding “no reliable sources” tag to some search engine results

submitted by [deleted] from (reclaimthenet.org)

all 6 comments
sorted by:
new (suggested)
topinsightfulfun

[–]Froglich 2 insightful - 3 fun2 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

The prompt reads:

“It looks like these results are changing quickly

“If this topic is new, it can sometimes take time for results to be added by reliable sources”

What? Like the lab leak hoax?

MSM March 2020: "The diseases is caused by bats. Happened at a meat market. Bats are known for their delicious meat. Chinese people eat bats, and Ebola hoaxing Africans."
Nothing to do with deep-state-funded flu lab.

Which is true, cause it's a hoax.

MSM 1 yr later: The narrative is collapsing... "Maybe...? This fake flu did come from... a fake lab..."

"Fucking bats..."

[–]slushpilot 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

This problem was addressed in the last Dark Horse podcast. They are moving their audience off YouTube and onto Odysee. It's a start at least.

Dark Horse #85

This is a huge problem when the official government sources are given special treatment. We need to arrive at consensus: enforcing it is not the same thing.

[–]Dragonerne 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Odysee is not a solution. Check their owner. It is more of the same

[–]slushpilot 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Diversifying on multiple platforms so there's not a single bottleneck is the solution. It's the next best thing to self-hosting.

Odysee is at least different in how it's built on the LBRY blockchain. Odysee.com is just the frontend web UI.

[–]StillLessons 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

They have actually highlighted the primary problem in the modern information landscape, and I dearly hope it comes back to destroy them.

Who decides what "Reliable Sources" are? We are waking up rapidly to the reality that when we give authority to a corporation like Google (or USG, MSNBC, NYT, WaPo, Snopes, HuffPost, etc, etc, etc...) to decide what is "reliable", that is the implementation of censorship. These organizations are telling us who to trust.

Guess what, Google. I have a small group of people in the world I trust, and none of them are on your "reliable sources" list. These people don't lie to me, they never have. Your "reliable sources", on the other hand, have lied to me again and again and again and again. These lies are documented. It's not interpretation. There are retractions demonstrating their outright lies. Still you continue to call these the "reliable sources".

More and more people are recognizing this.

If you see an organization promoting a "reliable source", realize you are being invited to censorship and run the other way, fast!

[–]Brewdabier 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's fun to fact check and see the BS, I just typed ufo filmed traveling 106 mph on Google and got this.