Google’s top news link for ‘final election results’ goes to a fake news site with false numbers

[Rob L 3,811]

If you head to Google to learn the final results of the presidential election, the search engine helpfully walks through the final electoral vote tallies and number of seats won by each party in the House and Senate. Under that, Google lists some related news articles. At the top this morning, with an accompanying photo: a story arguing that Donald Trump won both the popular and electoral votes.

That's not true.

The Daily Show's Dan Amira noticed that numbers were being spread on social media that linked back to the "70 News" site. The 70 News article cites its source as this tweet.

View image on Twitter

That tweet cites as its source USASupreme.com, another random website which doesn't actually include the numbers themselves. It does, however, argue that Hillary Clinton is "probably not going to win the actual number of votes cast. She may win the number of votes counted, but not the votes cast." That distinction is ... not really clear, except that the author, "Alex," seems to believe that absentee ballots are only counted if the tally could make the difference in the election.

That's not true, either.

In light gray text above the link to 70 News, Google relays the actual current tally of counted votes: Clinton has a lead of about 700,000. That lead has grown since Election Day and will almost certainly continue to grow, since millions of the votes being counted are from California, and the plurality of those votes are from very-Clinton-friendly Los Angeles County.

The source behind the "USA Supreme" website isn't clear. It looks an awful lot like Prntly, a made-up news website we looked at earlier this year. Founded by a former convict named Alex Portelli, Prntly is part of the broad diaspora of websites that takes news about American politics, frames it in a pro-Trump way (often at the expense of accuracy) and then peppers the page with ads. In an email, Portelli denied involvement in USA Supreme, suggesting that it was the work of a group of young people in Macedonia first reported by BuzzFeed. These sites leverage the inability of Facebook and other social media sites to weed out nonsense in order to get clicks and make money from advertising -- a remarkably lucrative endeavor, particularly in a country where the U.S. dollar stretches a lot further.

Why Google includes 70 News as a news source isn't clear. Among the main categories of news stories the site lists in its header is "Hillary's Health," which links to a number of rumors about the health of the Democratic nominee. Under "Politics" is a story that, among other things, links the Council on American-Islamic Relations to Al Qaeda. Another story suggests that protestors against Trump in California were being paid to do so.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/14/googles-top-news-link-for-final-election-results-goes-to-a-fake-news-site-with-false-numbers/

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

If you head to Google to learn the final results of the presidential election, the search engine helpfully walks through the final electoral vote tallies and number of seats won by each party in the House and Senate. Under that, Google lists some related news articles. At the top this morning, with an accompanying photo: a story arguing that Donald Trump won both the popular and electoral votes.

That's not true.

The Daily Show's Dan Amira noticed that numbers were being spread on social media that linked back to the "70 News" site. The 70 News article cites its source as this tweet.

View image on Twitter

That tweet cites as its source USASupreme.com, another random website which doesn't actually include the numbers themselves. It does, however, argue that Hillary Clinton is "probably not going to win the actual number of votes cast. She may win the number of votes counted, but not the votes cast." That distinction is ... not really clear, except that the author, "Alex," seems to believe that absentee ballots are only counted if the tally could make the difference in the election.

That's not true, either.

In light gray text above the link to 70 News, Google relays the actual current tally of counted votes: Clinton has a lead of about 700,000. That lead has grown since Election Day and will almost certainly continue to grow, since millions of the votes being counted are from California, and the plurality of those votes are from very-Clinton-friendly Los Angeles County.

The source behind the "USA Supreme" website isn't clear. It looks an awful lot like Prntly, a made-up news website we looked at earlier this year. Founded by a former convict named Alex Portelli, Prntly is part of the broad diaspora of websites that takes news about American politics, frames it in a pro-Trump way (often at the expense of accuracy) and then peppers the page with ads. In an email, Portelli denied involvement in USA Supreme, suggesting that it was the work of a group of young people in Macedonia first reported by BuzzFeed. These sites leverage the inability of Facebook and other social media sites to weed out nonsense in order to get clicks and make money from advertising -- a remarkably lucrative endeavor, particularly in a country where the U.S. dollar stretches a lot further.

Why Google includes 70 News as a news source isn't clear. Among the main categories of news stories the site lists in its header is "Hillary's Health," which links to a number of rumors about the health of the Democratic nominee. Under "Politics" is a story that, among other things, links the Council on American-Islamic Relations to Al Qaeda. Another story suggests that protestors against Trump in California were being paid to do so.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/14/googles-top-news-link-for-final-election-results-goes-to-a-fake-news-site-with-false-numbers/

Your side lost. Move on already

[MarkPerry 488]

Your side lost. Move on already

Words of Wisdom

[MarkPerry 488]

[russandraquel 86]

Your side lost. Move on already

Words of Wisdom

You are missing the point. The point is that the narrative that "Google tried to manipulate this election in Clinton's favor" is a false narrative.

[Rob L 3,811]

Your side lost. Move on already

The point of this article is not who won or lost. The point of this article is that fake news outpaces real news on Google Search and Facebook.

[Dakine10 5,452]

Two months ago, the top hit on a google search for oldest president at inauguration had president McCain (2009) on the list. It's probably more a symptom of what google search is and what it's designed to do. We may think of it as an informational search engine, but getting you the actual information that you are searching for is really a low priority.

[Rob L 3,811]

Two months ago, the top hit on a google search for oldest president at inauguration had president McCain (2009) on the list. It's probably more a symptom of what google search is and what it's designed to do. We may think of it as an informational search engine, but getting you the actual information that you are searching for is really a low priority.

My primary issue is that it appears in the "In the News" Section. and not the general search results. What is the algorithm that is establishing "In the News" and how can I tap into that with my own set of falsehoods? It seems to be a lot less work than other methods of influencing public opinion.

[bcking 3,157]

Your side lost. Move on already

No one is contesting the election. His point was addressing the "fake news" business that is catching attention right now with Facebook.

Even on real news sites Trump won. No one is denying that. But people on BOTH sides should want news to be as fact-based as possible and Google listing things as "In the News" that is just flatly false shouldn't be acceptable. This should go beyond political alignment.

[Rob L 3,811]

No one is contesting the election. His point was addressing the "fake news" business that is catching attention right now with Facebook.

Even on real news sites Trump won. No one is denying that. But people on BOTH sides should want news to be as fact-based as possible and Google listing things as "In the News" that is just flatly false shouldn't be acceptable. This should go beyond political alignment.

Exactly, the selection of the topic of the popular vote count is incidental, this is a threat to our democracy that we need to get ahead of.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

The threat has been here all along. Remember the past 6 months, telling us all that Clinton was leading in the polls? That Trump couldn't possibly win? We all believed it.

Exactly, the selection of the topic of the popular vote count is incidental, this is a threat to our democracy that we need to get ahead of.

[OriZ 3,157]

Even though I prefer Trump over Clinton, I have to say watching that graphic live that night was surreal in a way that made you feel like it's an April Fools joke or something. I mean, who would have ever actually really thought you would see "Donald Trump wins presidency" on your TV screen, it seems like something taken out of the Simpsons or South Park.

[jg121783 3,908]

The threat has been here all along. Remember the past 6 months, telling us all that Clinton was leading in the polls? That Trump couldn't possibly win? We all believed it.

It's funny. The corporate media has been feeding us fake news through out the whole election process and now they are pushing this narrative that if it is on the internet it is fake news. Even Obama is out giving speeches about fake news. They are desperate. They know their monopoly on information is fading quickly.

[Rob L 3,811]

It's funny. The corporate media has been feeding us fake news through out the whole election process and now they are pushing this narrative that if it is on the internet it is fake news. Even Obama is out giving speeches about fake news. They are desperate. They know their monopoly on information is fading quickly.

Yeah verily,. we live in the post-fact era.

[jg121783 3,908]

If you believe everything (or even a majority of) what the corporate media reports is facts I have a bridge to sell you.