By Weston Williams

Last year， Google implemented a new tool to fight the spread of misinformation on the web worldwide. The new “Fact Check” program automatically labels dubious stories in users search results， and provides links to fact-checking sites like Snopes and Politifact to establish the veracity of their claims.1

The new tool comes as major websites such as Google， Facebook， and Twitter continue to face pressure to check the spread of “fake news” across the internet， an issue which was catapulted2 into the spotlight during the US presidential campaign.

Over the past few years， sites such as Google have had to walk a fine line between policing false claims and supporting basic principles of free speech online. Google，after all， is the most popular search engine in the world， sporting more than 77 percent of the global search engine market share. And for many， that level of influence entails3 some responsibility to make sure its users are not misled.

“Building systems that help people get better at judging information is an important goal and helping people notice when information might not be credible is an excellent thing to do—in my work， I call this ‘designing for information assess ability，”says Andrea Forte， an assistant professor at Drexel Universitys College of Computing & Informatics in Philadelphia， Penn. “But depending on corporations to be responsible for educating people about credible information is not a reasonable solution.”

Dr. Forte said in an email that relying on ad revenue driven companies like Google is， at best， an“incomplete solution.” She adds that major websites depend on one-sided， positive messaging in order to make money， so even programs like Fact Check will never be an entirely reliable method of eliminating fake news and providing the user with fair， balanced information.

But its a start， she adds.

“Google was built to help people find useful information by surfacing the great content that publishers and sites create，” reads a blog post from Google explaining the new feature. “This access to high quality information is what drives people to use the web and for contributors to continue to engage and invest in it. However， with thousands of new articles published online every minute of every day， the amount of content confronting people online can be overwhelming.”

The new program was first tested in May， when Google gave publishers in certain countries the ability to show a Fact Check tag in Googles News section. The feature highlighted reputable articles that assessed the accuracy of statements by public figures.4

“For the first time， when you conduct a search on Google that returns an authoritative5 result containing fact checks for one or more public claims， you will see that information clearly on the search results page，” reads the Google blog. “The snippet6 will display information on the claim， who made the claim， and the fact check of that particular claim.”

A network of 115 fact-checking organizations will provide the accuracy assessment for dubious articles， rather than Google providing the fact-checking service itself. As a result， Google searches based on the same claim could return different takes on the storys accuracy or inaccuracy from different fact-checkers. But even with differing takes on a given storys accuracy， Google hopes that the range of opinions from different sources will give users an idea of the“degree of consensus” on any dubious claims.

Of course， some fake news readers will likely continue to reject the truth in favor of a fake news article that seems to support their pre-existing bias. But while Fact Check wont eliminate the problem of fake news completely， Forte thinks that Googles new tool is an important step in fighting the proliferation of misinformation on the web.

“Asking companies like Google and Facebook to think about these problems and do what they can to address them is a start， because designing to help people make good judgments should be a basic consideration in the design of all information systems，” says Forte. “But it doesnt go far enough. We need both technological and social solutions. Both good design and education.”

去年，谷歌發(fā)布了一款新的工具來阻止虛假信息在網(wǎng)絡(luò)上傳播。這個“事實(shí)核實(shí)”程序能夠自動標(biāo)記用戶搜索結(jié)果中的可疑信息，還能向用戶提供像“Snopes”和“Politifact”這樣戳穿謠言的網(wǎng)站鏈接以驗(yàn)證其真實(shí)性。

谷歌、臉書以及推特等各大網(wǎng)站所面臨的控制“假新聞”在網(wǎng)上傳播的壓力使得這款新工具應(yīng)運(yùn)而生。假新聞猖獗的情況在美國總統(tǒng)競選期間引起了人們的關(guān)注。

在過去的幾年里，像谷歌這樣的網(wǎng)站不得不在監(jiān)管假消息和維護(hù)網(wǎng)絡(luò)言論自由的基本原則之間拿捏好分寸。它畢竟是世界上最受歡迎的搜索引擎，占據(jù)全球市場份額的77%以上。許多人認(rèn)為，這種級別的影響力就需要谷歌承擔(dān)起一定的責(zé)任，確保其用戶不被誤導(dǎo)。

“搭建能夠幫助用戶更好地甄別信息的系統(tǒng)是一個非常重要的目標(biāo)，幫助人們識別出不可信的信息是一件非常棒的事情——在我的工作中，我把這稱為‘信息評估能力設(shè)計，”賓夕法尼亞州費(fèi)城的德雷塞爾大學(xué)計算機(jī)與信息學(xué)院的助理教授安德烈婭·福特說道，“但是只指望網(wǎng)絡(luò)公司來教人們識別可靠信息并不是一個合理的解決方案。”

福特博士在郵件中說道，依靠谷歌這樣靠廣告收入驅(qū)動的公司解決這一問題，充其量也不過是個“不完善的解決方案”。她還說道，各大網(wǎng)絡(luò)公司都是依靠片面的、積極的消息來賺錢，所以即便是像“事實(shí)核實(shí)”這樣的程序也永遠(yuǎn)不會成為一個完全可以依賴的、消除假新聞的，并且能夠?yàn)橛脩籼峁┱鎸?shí)可靠的信息的途徑。

但這是個開始，她補(bǔ)充道。

“谷歌的使命就是幫助用戶通過瀏覽發(fā)布商和網(wǎng)站提供的優(yōu)質(zhì)內(nèi)容進(jìn)而找到有用的信息，”谷歌發(fā)布了一篇博文來解釋這個新功能?！斑@種獲取高質(zhì)量信息的渠道是讓用戶繼續(xù)使用這個網(wǎng)站、讓股東繼續(xù)參與并投資的動力。然而，每天每分鐘有成千上萬的新文章在網(wǎng)上發(fā)布，用戶面對的內(nèi)容數(shù)量是非常巨大的?！?/p>

這個新程序起初是在5月測試的，當(dāng)時谷歌給幾個國家的發(fā)布商開通了能夠在谷歌新聞頁面顯示事實(shí)核查標(biāo)簽的功能。這項功能可以標(biāo)記出已經(jīng)檢驗(yàn)過公眾人物言論準(zhǔn)確性的可靠文章。

“這是第一次當(dāng)你用谷歌搜索出一個包含了對公共言論事實(shí)核查的權(quán)威性結(jié)果時，你可以在搜索結(jié)果頁面很清楚地看到這一信息，”谷歌的博文寫道，“旁邊的一小段文字會提供那個公共言論的有關(guān)信息。包括言論的發(fā)布者以及這一言論的可靠性檢驗(yàn)?！?/p>

由115個事實(shí)核查組織構(gòu)成的系統(tǒng)將對可疑文章進(jìn)行可靠性檢查，而不是谷歌公司自己提供核查服務(wù)。所以，使用谷歌搜索所得到的信息可能會被不同的事實(shí)核查方得出不同的結(jié)論。但是即便這些結(jié)論是不同的，谷歌公司也希望這些不同來源的不同的觀點(diǎn)能夠讓用戶知道可疑信息的“共識程度”。

當(dāng)然，一些用戶可能會繼續(xù)拒絕接受真相，而去相信能夠支持其固有偏見的假新聞。不過，盡管事實(shí)核查程序無法完全消除假新聞，福特博士認(rèn)為，谷歌的這個新工具在對抗虛假信息在網(wǎng)絡(luò)上肆意傳播方面仍然是非常關(guān)鍵的一步舉措。

“要求谷歌和臉書這樣的公司為假消息問題出謀劃策并且盡其所能解決這些問題只是一個開始，因?yàn)閹椭藗儗π畔⑦M(jìn)行正確的判斷是所有的信息系統(tǒng)應(yīng)該考慮的基本問題，”福特博士說道，“但是我們做得還遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠。我們既需要科技層面的解決方案，也需要社會層面的。既需要好的設(shè)計，也需要好的教育?！?/p>

1. Snopes： 美國一家專門核查并揭穿謠言和傳聞的網(wǎng)站；Politifact： 《坦帕灣時報》編輯委員會運(yùn)營的一個博客，負(fù)責(zé)對國會議員、白宮、游說人士以及各利益集團(tuán)的聲明進(jìn)行事實(shí)核實(shí)。

2. catapult： 突然把……捧出名。

3. entail： 需要，使……成為必需。

4. highlight： （在計算機(jī)上用不同顏色）突出顯示，（用色筆）標(biāo)出；reputable： 聲望好的，值得信賴的。

5. authoritative： 權(quán)威性的。

6. snippet： 一小條信息。