undeniably part of the LLL
sell that stock!

yeah wonkette is a news site but you arent

/is a sarc tag really needed

can we affect change?
who do we write to?

Google is notoriously anti-semetic. I had gone to war with them over what happens when you google the word Jews many many moons ago -
the lame answer I got was similar to the answer Charles got.
Zillions of blogs turn up on Google - they are completely full of shit. If you google babbazee stuff I have posted on blogs comes up.
They have a clear agenda, and it ain't ours. Jews

"hey google, what's a matter,ya skared"

They're giving you the run around, possibly because of the moslem angle.

The last time around, they couldn't include you because you didn't have a staff. This time around, they gave you an obviously bullshit reason about "news aggregators".

Google stinks.

I'd advise everyone to shut their pie holes until this is definitive. Always ranting about everything, huh? Let's give Google some time, jeez...

Methinks the Googlers needs a new blog/aggregator category.

Or prehaps GoogleNews is run by MSM refugees?

lgf: Palestinian Debating Society Convenes; 2 Killed
... #117, BabbaZee 11/14/2004 03:17PM PST. [bigoted word]S! [bigoted word]S. #118,
zulubaby 11/14/2004 03:18PM PST. HULUGU, tlc and comfort food -- you're ...
littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=13587 - 425k - Cached - Similar pages

OK Patrizio - #8 - i think they changed their minds

Although the Ra^thergate story was the spectacular story it was, at least as big as Watergate and ours was meant to derail an election, still LGF was able to generate original stories even earlier.

Just a couple of weeks before the CBS fiasco, there was the discovery of the anarchists intending to derail the Republican
Convention by publishing the names and pertinent address information of the delegates. A story about the discovery of the anarchist student-teacher from Cornell U. in the New York Times about the event, though, didn't mention LGF. Still, it was Protest Warrior's registration list they published with the help of the Indymedia Crowd and it's link to the anarchists who used the site as a message board to call their troops to action, which posters at LGF discovered and it's exposure resulted in the FBI arriving at Cornell to question the anarchist-student-teacher and the eventual aborting of whatever plans the anarchist crowd had (the anarchist teacher published a description after the event).

Aren't the MSM agregators as well since they just take stuff from UPI AP and NYT?

Everytime I Google anything I get blog hits. Maybe if you offered them our personal information and web addresses...

The hell with Google. We don't need them. Anyone who really needs to know can find us and the rest wouldn't understand us anyway. If we get too big, we may not like it. Remember, folks, whenever LGF gets a notice in the MSM we all have to duck and run for cover with the troll invasion and even the well-meant readers can slow everything to a crawl.

Beware of what you wish for!

"Hi Charles" Gee they are so friendly... what a bunch of phonies they are.

I f you yahoo, LGF, you get "LGF watch' as one of the top categories. Bill and Ted are donk-dummies too. And that CEO movie guy is their CEO and prob a LLL too.

Nice work on #12, Charles.

itellu3times (#9),

Or prehaps GoogleNews is run by MSM refugees?

Do a little searching and find out.

I missed #12. Was it at least funny?

---

Concerning original news stories, don't zombie's forays count? IDFDave's? Rayra's? Etc.

^5 on #12 CJ.

#17 cba:

Who was that masked man?

Which is why I use Alta Vista and Dog Pile ...I only use google when there's no where left to go.
Google used to be a good internet tool.

[Link: www.technorati.com...]
6,754,261 weblogs watched.819,445,634 links tracked.

You are #23 among the top 100.
lgf: the terrible infant speaks 6,282 links from 4,208 sources

Pretty darn impressive.

The real reason that a "News" clearinghouse doesn't want LGF most likely has something to do with the relentless "fact-checking" that goes on.

LGF is like a spoon pounding on pots and pans in the background of the orchestrated MSM symphony.

REMEMBER THIS?

An explanation of our search results.

If you recently used Google to search for the word "Jew," you may have seen results that were very disturbing. We assure you that the views expressed by the sites in your results are not in any way endorsed by Google. We'd like to explain why you're seeing these results when you conduct this search.

A site's ranking in Google's search results is automatically determined by computer algorithms using thousands of factors to calculate a page's relevance to a given query. Sometimes subtleties of language cause anomalies to appear that cannot be predicted. A search for "Jew" brings up one such unexpected result.

If you use Google to search for "Judaism," "Jewish" or "Jewish people," the results are informative and relevant. So why is a search for "Jew" different? One reason is that the word "Jew" is often used in an anti-Semitic context. Jewish organizations are more likely to use the word "Jewish" when talking about members of their faith. The word has become somewhat charged linguistically, as noted on websites devoted to Jewish topics such as these:

[Link: shakti.trincoll.edu...]
[Link: www.jewishworldreview.com...]

Someone searching for information on Jewish people would be more likely to enter terms like "Judaism," "Jewish people," or "Jews" than the single word "Jew." In fact, prior to this incident, the word "Jew" only appeared about once in every 10 million search queries. Now it's likely that the great majority of searches on Google for "Jew" are by people who have heard about this issue and want to see the results for themselves.

Our search results are generated completely objectively and are independent of the beliefs and preferences of those who work at Google. Some people concerned about this issue have created online petitions to encourage us to remove particular links or otherwise adjust search results. Because of our objective and automated ranking system, Google cannot be influenced by these petitions. The only sites we omit are those we are legally compelled to remove or those maliciously attempting to manipulate our results.

We apologize for the upsetting nature of the experience you had using Google and appreciate your taking the time to inform us about it.

Sincerely,
The Google Team

Please note: we have this confusion every time the subject comes up. I'm referring to Google News, not the Google search index.

Google is like the NYT on LSD. They don't even try to make sense, and headquartered in LLL-Caliphornia-land, appear to have no need to.

12 Mich-again
I like it the spoons/pot-MSM symphony

I've been saying for a long time that Google news gives placement to Chicom new services Xinhau and China Daily all out of proportion to their usefulness. I am convinced they do this to kiss the ass of the emperor of China so that maybe he'll let them lick up some internet crumbs that fall from his plate. Of course that will only happen if China finds them useful. Wouldn't it be nice if the zillionaire American hippies who own Google actually confront the Chicoms over their fascist slave owner mentality concerning the flow of information to "their people." But that might cost them a nickle, and besides it wouldn't be very PC.

OT

1.00 EUR = 1.29270 USD
Euro United States Dollars

We have gained nearly a dime since Bush got re elected

#19 Thom:

I missed #12. Was it at least funny?

Nah. A homophobic comment from one of those tolerant, inclusive, peace-loving types.

I didn't check its political credentials, but I'd bet it was LLL.

@8 Patrizio

Oh now, aren't you a piece of work...coming onto someone elses weblog to Rant...telling posters to shut their pie holes...whatta maroon

#31 cba

Yes. Those types are well known for their respect and consideration for others.

Aren't most 'newspaper' websites simply news aggregators? if you look at them they simply re-publish AP, Reuters or AFP news releases... Often the only areas they generate themselves are the opinion pages and editorials. Much the way LGF works (with more news sources that the above three and an emphasis on opinion and editorials)...

Here is some original news analysis:

The US spends over $500 billion on it's military. Syria spends less than $1 billion, Iran spends less that $5 billion. The US needs $80 billion for the presence in Iraq and Afghanistan, largely due to the presence of Iranian and Syrian Insurgents. Given it would only take "days" to forcibly remove the regimes providing these insurgents, it is good economics to go ahead and do it.

Think this keeps the Neo-Cons up at night.

Case in point vis a vis Google news and the Chicoms. Right now at this moment their front page coverage of W's post-State of the Union politics has a pix credited Xinhau, the Chicom news service. Why?

All sing: "Money makes the world go round"

The google people are leftists who strain information through a left-wing filter like good little fascists.

#7 Thom:

You're right about Google; they've been moving the goal posts. But in the immortal words of someone or other..."F**k 'em if they can't take a joke!" Who needs 'em? Too much traffic isn't necessarily a good thing. Quality NOT QUANTITY!

I'd sooner know, say, that Andy Card or someone in the W.H. was reading us than be on Googles dubious list (it lists KOS and anyone that lists KOS is not something I want to be part of).

BTW, Charles, give our regards to Stinky Beaumont and a Happy New Year too! :)

28 Big L

Thanks, but I had nothing to do with deleted comment 12. Mine was 24.

The incredible amount of political, historical, philosophical and scientifical information shared on this Blog makes of it a FIRST SOURCE of info.

That's why they don't like it, it's serious and deep, makes people think.

It scares the moonbats.

It seems to me a pointless excercise in trying to get the world to be "even handed" or fair about left vs right. There are some people who are tremendously angry about the blogs (and perhaps littlegreenfootballs was a real leader in this, I don't read other blogs). The evidence on the memo was very convincing to me and I'm no stranger to technical writings.

So look at the refusal as a badge of honor. Well deserved I may add. Also in regard to thread times. Israel is 10 hours of from Calif and the expectation that someone is going to get up at 5 AM to participate in a ME topic blog is so way off from normal that I have to laugh. Shabbat is a break for me too, but I realize that the rest of the world has it's own agenda.

12 ploome

You are sooo funny

What was that ?
Was it by Ploome ?
What ?

OT thinking of Googly owners-
Hmm, I wonder if the money from the Soc Sec acccts-voluntary programthe private investment accts being talked about would be funnelled into the Donk/rad left-backed
stock portfolios. Aren't there some LLL groups that have
endorsed certain stock funds or monetary funds abroad that
bet against the US stock mkt or US policies, or currency speculation funds like what Soros did.
Then the result would be the retirees money working to bring down the USA. Biting the hand that feeds them. Just investing in companies that back lefty candidates might be biting your feeding hand, and if there was a basket of those comapanies
you'd get more 527s.
/hmmm

Dammit, I missed it.

Poitiers-Lepanto,

No, it was just a vile insult directed at Charles by a puny minded fool, his third and last post at LGF.

Well, Charles, at least the moonbats care about you.

Right Bloggers Stalk CNN

I didn't know you'd been hiding in Jordan's bushes. I thought you'd just kinda called him out for making seditious statements abroad.

#22 quark 2:

I hate the revamped Google. It doesn't give the information it used to give. It's crappy and I end having to go elsewhere anyway because it's now so limited. I'll try the two you mention. It's really only a matter of what you become acccustomed to and I can change. I gave up cigarettes, I can switch from Google. Just watch me! Sell you stock!

PLOOME
Wild isnt it?

#24 mich-again:

"LGF is like a spoon pounding on pots and pans in the background of the orchestrated MSM symphony."

Perfect! What a great analogy!

#29 Luigi:

Because power is corrupting, the moment they went on the Stock Ex. they became a victim of their own success. I''m talking Google ethics, now, Charles, not the News specifically, but it all links really, so though they've locked LGF out as a news source, the rest of what they are offering naturally came up today and as a resource I have to say, I find their new revamp disconcerting and unsatisfying. I think their stock is going to go south so if you have any, I'd think of selling. That's all I'm saying.

New York is gorgeous today
taking Dagny for a run along the water

keep fighting!

#43 ploome hineni

Nope. I would refer you to the ancient legal principle of "finders keepers, losers weepers". dB^þ

Google? Pubically owned Company? IF it is ..buy a few shares ..go to the Meeting...Scream and Yell...

Here is an idea for what you should slap on anything Google and Organization like Google...A Jewish Star..ie White Star on whatever color background (not blue so as not to confuse this with the Israeli Flag) with a Diagonal Red Line thru it. This is the symbol for AntiJewish Cos or Entities. Anyone want to make one up? I dont know how to do it quickly..if at all.

ploome, check your email.

At the moment, Google tries to sequeze some blogs into its corporate news search and rejects others, with mixed results. I want a Google with one search engine for corporate media, and another one for blogs. What prevents the Google corporation from recognizing blogs as a medium unlike any other deserving its own category, such as web, images, groups and news? A search algorithm would obviously combine some functionality of the news search (e.g. grouping of stories) with other features from the web search (e.g. ranking based on mutual links)

Every morning I wake up and go to Drudge. Then I say, okay what's really going on today and go to LGF.

wonkette? good grief.

follow the money --I think the stock exchange comment was probably the first lead. Who owns who?

#52 Powderfinger:

The LLL can't tolerate fact-checking on their buddies in the MSM. I wonder how long it will take a new MSM meme that "right wing bloggers stalk CNN unfairly" and a move to start legislation in Congress to shut down LGF!

#26 Charles,

EXACTLY.

There is NO way in hell Wonkette qualifies, but this site does not. Well not unless Google thinks that Wonkette publishing the results of her research on candidate penis size and curvature is "news". GoogleNews=LLL

#9 itellu3times Methinks the Googlers needs a new blog/aggregator category.

Hey, great Idea something similar to Technocrati. When you think about the math works out better that way. Look at it like this: Google + blog search catergory= more recognition! Cigars and whiskey everybody! Then the next time the blogoshpere busts another crapy MSM story like memogate people will have better acces to us! I know it looks good on paper but it could work.

The new meme of LGF "stalking CNN" is started up because the LLL thinks it's a greater evil to fact-check Eason Jordan then what Eason Jordan said.

Yes, unfortunately, Google has dhimiffied themselves.

This blog was first with the Air France flight 68 interception story on the next to the last day of 2003.
It turns out that a poster at Free Republic was ahead of lizardoids Josh and my humble self in posting the news (gleaned from monitoring FAA radio traffic), but Charles was ahead of every other news outlet in headlining it.
The difference, of course, is that Charles is a named person with a direct and consistent responsibility for content, as opposed to an anonymous poster.
Skeptics were confounded when the MSM finally got around to reporting the story a couple of days later, with the usual implied self-credit for a dramatic scoop.

(one more comment real quick)
I just love it when people start talking about the inner workings of a big corporation or the MSM. You can almost seem start to nervously shift in there seats.

OK. One day, during the past election, I opened news.google to find every single story link was anti-Bush and pro Kerry. Not really all that unusual, but I wrote google asking why they considered "The daily Communist Prariedog" and other sort of newsfeeds important and they wrote back right away saying they were "working" on their algorithm. A few weeks ago the lead story (upper left corner bold) was something like "Bush admits he Lied about Iraq" next to his picture. I followed the link and the "newsfeed" was a freakin letter to the editor to some off-the-wall tiny, unknown workers' daily newsletter. I wrote google again and never received a reply.
I think that says it all.

OT: Here we go again!

The race begins for 2008

Is it just me, or does the world seem to be going mad?

Going, going, ... GONE!

@Most of you: Uh...he said Google NEWS, not Google websearch. Get a grip, eh?

Any such group who would include Wonkette but not LGF is showing political bias. Wonkette? News? It is to laugh.

C'mon Charles does this seem Odd really?

For a Bay Area company to include Paleo sites to "ever so politely" exclude "ratherBiased", or "LittleGreenFootballs" documentation.

It would be difficult to exclude a rack of lawyers from "Powerline"

but you just sit in your living room in pajamas, typing away, "right" ?

#79
"@ most of you"

Get a grip yourself, you lying jackass. On the evidence, the posts themselves, "most of us" are not at all confused about the distinction.

Charles, I may be an optimist, but it's possible they are considering adding LGF. The first reply sounds like a quick, pat response. Your second request probably went to a higher authority and (I hope) is being given more careful consideration.

#82 S-K,

exactly it is a few.

The distinction here is that G-N is filtering their "news" by excluding "right wing"(read fact based) blogs that engage in collective fact screening. Jungle John and the MSM may well have gotten away with stealing an election had Memogate not been blown apart...add in the failed "October suprise" becuase of the increased focus sites like this and RatherBiased generated protected Bush.

Their inclusion of "I'd wear my kneepads" Wonkette and exclusion of Charles and Ratherbiased is dirty and does not pass the smell test.

Speaking of antiwar.com...

Did you hear anyone respond to the voter turnout in Iraq was a result of the US goverment threatening to halt Iraqi's food rations?

The short short version of this meme is that the voter turnout was so high because Iraqis had to recertify there qualifications for food rations when they registered to vote. Then in order to continue to qualify for food rations they had to certify they voted. Each province has food rations czars that the local go to and these czars are allegedly tools of PM Allawi.

Well Justin Raimondo wrote a response piece to the voter turnout sourcing his food rations meme to the Iraqi blogger "Secrets in Baghdad". Since I figured that a single blog entry was probably not enough evidence to consider it a reliable source I sent an email to the editor of Antiwar.com to ask them if they had other sources.

Well the editors replied and used this story as their source. The problem with the source is the source. Dahr Jamail is a source for news in Iraq like Michael Moore is a source for accuracy in film making. Here is an excerpt from an interview conducted with Jamail by Newtopia Magazine. When asked what brought Jamail to Iraq...

I have spent 6 of the last 12 months in Iraq. As I mentioned, what brought me here was the nearly total failure of the US ‘mainstream’ media to show the truth of this illegal invasion and occupation. How it affected the Iraqis, as well as US soldiers. Overall, they just weren’t doing their job, and this has grown even worse.

Not satisified that this was a reliable source, the only source not an Iraqi blogger, I searched around to find other stories that cite the food rations meme. Not difficult to find on leftist websites and anti-american Iraqi bloggers I found them all to be linking to an Inter Press Service story on the same subject.

The sole reporter for Inter Press Services in Iraq is none other than Dahr Jamail.

I have a friend who works at google. He is one of those liberal academic types, self-hating Jew, etc. and likes to call me an uninformed neocon idiot, so that helps explain google's position on LGF.

#50 Geepers

Thank you.

#4 babazee Google being anti semitic...

One of the founder of Google is Jewish from Russia... I am thinking he is from an Orthodox family. Isnt his name Sergei ?

Al Gore sits on Google's board -- 'nuff said. Compugeek liberals with billions, probably Soros wannabees.

Google is bias. When the Michael Boore movie came out the story was is the same spot for months on google news homepage. I thought it was computer generated.

And those comments about China Daily and Xinhua news on Google News...that sure got my head working !

Yeah, I was wondering why those are so prominent on Google...and thought maybe it was because they report the news last ?

But now...I am really wondering about the politics behind it...interesting !

I should be more accurate -- Gore is a "Senior Advisor" to Google and sits on Steve "hand" Jobs Apple Board.Goreiffic

In defense of Wonkette, she does have 'operatives' that break stories:

1) Who Jenna Bush is dating;
2) What Jenna Bush is drinking;
3) Where Jenna Bush is partying;
4) When Jenna Bush gets home.

What? Isn't that news?

I posted this on the other thread, but..

LGF was the fifth hit on a search for WWII, French appeasement, and the Nazis

So, Charles, we are getting hits, but just not the official listing as a news source.

Gee Charles, maybe they don't list these sites for free. Maybe there's payola to get on Google... Just sayin...

#95,

remember Bubbles it is Google-News that is short-shrifting LGF...

but yeah I think you either pay them in cash, or in kind for their agenda...

Their caving to Red China's "news" agency would be like slaving Google to the old 70s-80s Tass or Pravda...

sven

Sven

Hi Sven

No, I was referring to Google News, it wouldn't surprise me if they wanted money to get your blog referred to there. Call me cynical, but Wonkette, that is beyond the pale. I've only been there twice, the last time when a picture of Jenna Bush and the caption about Jenna drinking Jew baby's blood. Everyone knows Wonkette is a paid blogger. It's like come on, 2+2=4

Wonkette on the Google news is absurd... And I agree with Atlas Shrugged, it could very well be about the pro-Jewish stance on this blog... In this current environment of unspoken anti-Semitism within the media, I consider Google another species or hybrid of MSM.

Bubbles, ah makes sense then...

Yeah I think that Wonkette is either paying in kind, or a politico said "well if this new-fangled blooging thing is news she is one of ours..."

are the KOSby kids on G-N?

Sven

I have no idea, but wouldn't be surprised, there was a fluff piece about Kos the other day, chock full of BS about his site, so yeah, it wouldn't surprise me either.

Need to tell Charles that Churchill has in all probability many phoney skeletons in his closet, enough to request access to his application to CU, cause I am betting he's made up a majority of his background... Putting false information on State employment document is grounds for firing and/or illegal..

KOS used to be on Google News, but it was removed several months ago, when Google decided it was not worthy.

#93 Liberality

Under the guise, know thy enemy, I check Wonkette; i.e., Miss Potty Mouth, daily. I believe that she actually may have a "thing" or "desire" for young Jenna Bush. Just a thought!

"LGF is like a spoon pounding on pots and pans in the background of the orchestrated MSM symphony."

Still, it's got a beat and you can dance to it.

Charles, putting aside the question of original content for a moment, I find your indexing service much more useful than Google News. That news service (I think) puts the strongest trends on the front page. Strongest Trends = MSM, and I can get that view from the NYTimes or MSNBC when I want it.

Because Google News is so similar to other sites, I find I don't go there very often. I find your concern with anti-Terrorism/Israel, to be much more useful (and close to my own), which is why I check your site several times a day.

I would think that Google would find your expertise worthwhile, but maybe it's too specialized for their particular algorithm.

(Returning to the question of original content on LGF, I have found that very worthwhile as well. The Dan Rather scandal explanations are an obvious example.)

Bubbles,

I am thinking that if the MSM does not hit this story hard within the week that the Pajamarines will hit the beach along with the esteemed Mr. Jordan...

sven

To the guys who founded and run the great almighty LGF website:

Investigate and expose the entire Google.com for all the biases and frauds they have so far, sure enough to make the Rathergate scandal seem pale in comparison.

Investigate WHO funds and back Google.com. Investigate whose its board of directors are. Investigate the very people who select news and blogs for Google.com. Who made the final calls for 'em? What kind of people Google employed? Are they leftists, moonbats, UCBerkeley-indoctrinated interns, anti-war hippies, anti-Bush morons, Hillary Clinton/Janeane Garofloro-worshipping lesbians, Deansnuts (nuts who follow Howard Dean), anarchists and commies?

You guys helped bought down Dan Rather, now you can bring down Google.com to YOUR levels. :)

>>You guys helped brought down Dan Rather, now you can bring down Google.com to YOUR levels. :)

88 psaturn 2/5/2005 11:48AM PST

One of the founder of Google is Jewish from Russia... I am thinking he is from an Orthodox family. Isnt his name Sergei ?

I think so, but being Jewish has certainly never stopped anyone from being an anti-semite...
The Reuters founder's grandpa was a Rabbi too, I think. Many of the moonbats in Zombie's pictures are Jews - being a Jew and being a self loathing anti-semite are sadly not mutually exclusive.

Google News did a lot to pimp Michael Moore's "Farenheit 9/11". Articles, generally positive, about his movie were on the front page of their Entertainment section every day for well over a month. I emailed them several times asking why that was the case and they never had the courtesy to respond.

The Google search engine gained its market share because its results were more relevant to the query terms than other search engines. Heat needs to be brought against them to be more transparent in how the News section of Google is ran. In particular, are editorial decisions being made to weight articles from a certain viewpoint more than others?

Who Cares...get a hobby!

If the real issue concerning the "googleplex" is that LGF is not producing original news, perhaps charles could set up "LGF news"
a seperate section whyere he could post news provided by LGF operators. If every regular poster posted one digital photo they took and one article every week, it would really add up.

does google news still use indymedia articles?

ot

NEW YORK - Investigators probing alleged corruption at the United Nations (news - web sites) oil-for-food program are scrutinizing thousands of pages of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan (news - web sites)'s documents, including e-mail and phone records, to determine whether he exerted influence in securing a contract for a Swiss company that employed his son.

Paul Volcker, the head of the independent investigation, confirmed the document search and told The Associated Press that new information had led investigators to delay publishing their findings about Annan's son Kojo, whose activities have embroiled the U.N. chief in the growing scandal.

I suppose a solution is for us to start producing more original stories. Nothing like having a couple of thousand investigative reporters willing to work for free.

I know eventually someone at google has to pronounce LGF as either a
valid or invalid source of news, but is it possible that google (or
the metrics it employs) is completely amoral

So, if there are 300 anti-Israeli references for every 1 pro-Israeli
reference then it's listings will reflect this?
I know that's a very convenient cop-out for google, but it could
be their view.

Il Pollo Goyo

Get Lost!

Piglet, great idea...

#113,

well what would constitute 'news'?

How deep does Charles wish to go in the pursuit of news?

I am fairly certain that we could all generate original news content for every state of the Union, or at a minimum several. I have been pondering taking photos of the snail like pace of Louisiana highway construction. As an outsider their "blinding speed" is something to see and appreiciate.

The fact of the matter is the level of waste and amount if dipping into the cookie jar by the Louisiana General assembly is something to behold.

sven

Flying Pig, nobody here recognizes your authority so take your orders, advice, and unsupported opinions elsewhere.

Learn to think, spell, and distinguish your anus from a hole in the ground and you might be able to at least start the long climb to our level.

The nice thing about the internet is that there are no indispensable nodes in the system.
If one source of referral is blocked somehow, others will grow to meet the demand. It is like being able to grow your own heart bypasses. If Google were to somehow ban LGF entirely from both its news and its search components, this would not keep word of the site from spreading. It might even popularize it in many circles---"LGF-the blog the google-lords don't want you to see."

My first time here so be gentle.

Michelle Malkkin got the same response as Charles did when she asked them to include hers. I suggest that we (note: that means all of us) contact Google and request that they include LGF. If they get enough response from the public, there is a good chance that they will include them. After all, it is the public who evenually pays them. And, you'all know the old saying about " the squeaky wheel get the gease." So let's be squeaky.

RightMom

The photo features by "LGF operative zombie" are probably the best example of original reporting here.
There have been many of these, covering such subjects as the Bus 19 display and various moonbat demonstrations in the Bay area.
These are documented first-hand accounts from the scene and they examine aspects of these events that other media either miss or choose to ignore. If that isn't real reporting, nothing is.

Hey -drudroggy -- can your (boy) friend fill us in on the actual objective criteria which google uses?

Charles, I think you should mark original items like Zombie's reports with "LGF exclusive" or something similar, to emphasize the amount of news content actually generated here rather than being "aggregated" from other sources.

We do not include sites that are purely news aggregators, and we were not able to find any stories on your site that were not from outside sources.

Yeah, I guess they have high standards to uphold.

#102 Billy Hank

"LGF is like a spoon pounding on pots and pans in the background of the orchestrated MSM symphony."

Still, it's got a beat and you can dance to it.

A little more like dualing banjos at the MSM ballet.

Bursting the Google bubble. Sigh, sad if they don't reconsider and place LGF in a high spot of honor!

Trying (with some difficulty) to see this from Google's point of view, one could argue that Charles himself doesn't write big long essays very often -- instead, short but pithy commentary on news items. Whereas fellow authentic bloggers like Power Line often write longer pieces themselves, and quote less from the news stories; even phony pseudo-bloggers like Wonkette writes "original material," no matter how godawful, infantile and morally compromised it may be. Seen from this angle, Google has some kind of leg to stand on.

But I feel that line of reasoning can easily be rebutted. There are three sources of originality and newsworthiness that Charles can point to:

1. Uncovering and pointing to online information and newsworthy material that has completely eluded the major media or any other sites that Google references. For an obvious recent example, linking to the pdf download of the Saudi-hate-ideology report. Until the Dallas paper just picked it up today, this was a scoop on all the major newspapers, and just about the only place one could find out about it was on LGF. This is more than just "aggregating" news, this is uncovering the source material and generating the buzz that the media will much later pick up on. In fact, in some sense it is superior to the subsequent "news" coverage of the story, because Charles allows readers access to the source material, whereas a newspaper report will just parcel out a biased summary of the material, rife with whatever agenda the editor imparts, and does not offer the reader access to the original source material. I'd estimate that Charles uncovers overlooked source material around 3 - 7 times a week.

2. As others have noted, there are various contributors (such as myself) who offer up original content generated by themselves, and usually presented as an exclusive on LGF. Often, this original material goes above and beyond what can be found in the standard media. There are the photojournalists, such as zombie, IDFDave, Rayra, and others, and there are essayists and analysts who post their material on sites or blogs that might be described as subsets of LGF; parasitical adjuncts that actually make up an essential part of the LGF organism. I'm sure there are are several of such original reports or analyses each week, though it's hard to assign a number.

3. Unlike Power Line or Wonkette, LGF allows comments -- and what comments they are! Dozens of times every day, a commenter will uncork a beautiful mini-essay, or a piece of cogent news analysis, that is equal to or exceeds the material found either as front-page posts on other blogs, or even columns found in the mainstream media. Just because some of the best material on LGF is "buried" in the comments, doesn't mean it isn't there or that it is unworthy. I'd rather read what my fellow LGFers have to say about a topic or theme or trend as opposed to most any other analysts.

Put together all these three sources of original content, and you can make an extremely strong argument that LGF most definitely IS a source of original material, at least equal to many of the other mediocre blogs that Google lists.

The three sources are, again, 1. Links to offsite source material overlooked by everyone else, 2. Original journalistic content supplied to LGF exclusively by LGFers with parasitical Web sites, and 3. Essays and analyses supplied by brilliant commenters.

Furthermore, a huge number of so-called "newspapers" linked to by Google News are themselves nothing more than "news aggregators." Ever looked at the source material for many small-city newspapers with small staffs? 95% of their news items are taken from the wire services, while only the gardening column and the local obituaries are original content. By this standard, LGF is just as legitimate as the majority of other "news sources" referenced by Google News.

Charles, I think you should email Google this post, with perhaps links to examples of the three categories cited above. I think they could be convinced.

I don't think that Google News is all that important. Who goes there anyway? And judging from the sites they have chosen, it may actually be a liability. They should be begging Charles to join--- and offering him a user's fee!

Indymedia has also been indexed by Google News as a legitimate News source.

Despite the obvious problems with the material on those sites, they too were furious when Google changed its policy.

It's unclear where they currently stand.

#126)

well indymedia seems to think it's all a big right-wing pressure cooker thing on G-N...

never knew Wonkette was a right-winger...

As far as I know Daily Kossak isn't a "News" site either. Powerline is though...for some inexplicable reason.

Just my personal opinion, but aren't we bloggers, not reporters? Woudn't we be considered more like Opinion Jounalists than reporters?

Just a thought.

Maybe we could push google for a blog search engine?

I do an occasional Google News (yes Google News, not Google) search for various combinations of "Nazi", "Zionist", "Holocaust" "Myth", "Jews" and "Nazis".

This achieves two things. Firstly, it lets me see articles (often in Arab newspapers) suggesting what you might imagine.

Secondly, it tells me what sort of sites are indexed by Google News (and therefore considered "news sources" by Google).

A Google News search a few minutes ago for Zionist" linked to this article on Electronic Intifada which makes this astonishing claim:

Some Jews, especially on the left, would go even further by linking Israel's behavior to the upsurge of the new anti-Semitism throughout the world.

Apparently Jews are now responsible for anti-Semitism.

It's not fair to hold Google entirely responsible for the content of totally automated algorithms like their search or News robots. Indeed most of the Arab media is a problem.

But Electronic Intifada?

Charles

There is justice! When I first posted here, nearly a year ago, I posted that particular site from morons.org, and you had a way to stop it, and kindly explained why when I emailed you.

When I clicked on it, a Trojan alert popped up from McAfee to tell me that a Trojan was found and deleted; I did it 3 times, to be sure. Now I am scanning.

Has anyone else had this happpen? I am on IE, luckily, as if I was on AOL, I would have to shut down and reboot! :)

Here's another example of Google News' selectivity - that esteemed news source "Conpiracy Planet" which appears to take actual news articles and repackage them with demended anti-semitic headlines.

[Link: news.google.com...]

"Rabbi's Circumcision-Blowjob Kills Infant"

I think that now that some time has passed, and considering Charles' additions to the post, it IS reasonable to denounce Google News for biased coverage or at least dubious selection standards.

#132 Morgan

And here is the same article, with the title that was in the newspaper that had the exclusive: Fear rabbi gave tots herpes

This is not the first, second or tenth-plus time that Google has managed to do this, yet they claim a numerical or some such system causes the placement. There was another hate site that belongs to the cult of islam site that they used as #1 last year, and so many people complained that they somehow changed the order..I wish I could remember the site...I think it was this one, , and the egregious hate site is now #3, and a few more, but at least they qualify it with a sort of disclaimer as to its' anti-Israel hate...

Now that Google is a public company, shouldn't a lawsuit be possible?

It seems it should depend on whether google is considered to be a content provider, in the sense that any cable company is allowed to choose which channels it offers users. If google is considered to be an in impartial aggregator and advertises itself as such, I can see a good case for discrimination.

In reality, almost all news sources, whether it be CNN or your local news, do not create original content a large chunk of the time. Open up your local paper and check how many of the stories are AP/Reuters etc.

They are LLL nuts, especially the 2 leaders I'm afraid. I saw they were going to start up a Google Foundation, and I'm sure the $ will be well-wasted.

Indymedia is in Google News, for Heaven's sake.

OT:

The Holocaust -- whose 60th anniversary once again gave the world pause to consider how humans could do such horrible things to one another -- could never, ever happen in a Muslim country.

Media Monitors Net Nuts

Hey Charles, Here's a News Aggregator they use: [Link: allafrica.com...] I look for news there often, and it's mostly only re-publishing from other news sources. Out of 850,000 articles, there are 1,380 (0.1623529 %) that are by AllAfrica.com reporters. I didn't even know they do their own reporting, I had to look for it. Oh, and Danny Glover visited their offices recently.

Man, is morons.org appropriately named, or what.

I gave up on getting balanced news from GoogleNews months ago. It appears to me they are only a shill for the MSM. Their choice, in a free society. My choice is to not go there!

...we don't need no stinking googles!

This may be old news, but here is another blogger that was also turned down by the "good" folks at Google.

Michelle Malkin

I'm adding her to my "bookmarks."

Once again, thanks Charles!

In a strange way, this bias of Google News reminds me of the Monty Python "Spam" skit. While Google News claims complete inpartiality, since their top stories are determined by computer algorithm, in truth total bias is built into the system, since human beings determine the selection of news sources from which the computers will impartiality select the winners. And if Google's human editors intentionally exclude any anti-idiotarian site and purposely include all sort of moonbat garbage heaps, then their claim to offer a wide range of opinions is just like that of the waitress in the skit who offers the cafe's wide selection: "Well, you can have Spam, Spam, Spam, eggs and Spam, Spam, Spam and eggs, Spam or Spam."

#143 zombie,

Another problem is that LGF deals with, and respects the truth. If Charles posted any old dreck that popped into his head and spun a few conspiracy theories, then LGF might merit the 'original news source' label from Google News.

zombie (#143),

Have you ever tried Newsmap?

PDM (#144),

LGF's hallmark has always been the analysis and research in the threads.

Well, it used to be anyway.

#146 Geepers,

LGF's hallmark has always been the analysis and research in the threads.

True, but that's not the product that Google News is pushing. In many cases it's of higher quality than the product Google News is pushing.
If only there was a way we could produce something that would really turn them on... something amazing... something worthy of Art Bell.

Maybe if you relocated in Ramallah like this guy you might get in. This article came up on Google News when I was searching for a new French novel on the Holocaust.

[Link: www.ramallahonline.com...]

They don't link to hate sites either. ...not that this is a hate site, but many of the regulars here are quite hateful.

Google donates lots of money to anti-2nd-Amendment groups.

[Link: www.worldnetdaily.com...]