Hacker News Reader

Comment by thisisdallas | Hacker News Reader

Be fair I didn't read the article. Just judging by the site, the headline, and current events, I assume the problem is that the content of the page is opinion instead of fact.

Ok, what's wrong with that? If that site/blog post has gained more traffic, social signals, backlinks, etc. etc than it's "competitors" shouldn't it naturally be top ranking?

View on HN

That's not what the article is about. It's about misinformation; the fact that people are citing these sites and touting numbers that "prove" that Hilary lost on both electoral and popular vote.

I've seen some (really condescending) comments doing just that. I thought they were on drugs or just trolls.

> touting numbers that "prove" that Hilary lost on both electoral and popular vote.

Which is moot point until someone can scientifically prove the person who's calculations showed Hillary losing the popular vote are indeed inaccurate, correct?

What gives you the impression that it's opinion and not fact? The article in question is making a factual claim, it just happens to be completely wrong.

It's like googling "moon landing date" and the first hit is a page that sincerely argues "the moon landing never happened."

> It's like googling "moon landing date" and the first hit is a page that sincerely argues "the moon landing never happened."

And that's what I am confused about. Isn't google suppose to the show the most popular result based on a set of criteria?

Not in the "news" section. The complaint isn't that it's the first hit in the regular search results, it's that it's the first hit under news. (Or rather, it was. Now this Washington Post piece is first, and the false article is second!)

Ahh ok, I see. Odd.

It pretends to be a fact, not opinion.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com