The first remarkable statement comes from the first chapter:
The entities that engage in disinformation have a diverse set of goals. Some are financially motivated, engaging in disinformation activities for the purpose of turning a profit… Levels of funding and sophistication vary across those entities, ranging from local mom-and-pop operations to well-funded and state-backed campaigns… Sometimes, a successful disinformation narrative is propagated by content creators who are acting in good faith and are unaware of the goals of its originators.
Google speaks here of entities in relation to the publishers or authors.
We have an important responsibility to our users and to the societies in which we operate to curb the efforts of those who aim to propagate false information on our platforms.
Here, Google once again emphasizes its own responsibility towards the users of its services and society.
This complexity makes it difficult to gain a full picture of the efforts of actors who engage in disinformation or gauge how effective their efforts may be. Furthermore, because it can be difficult to determine whether a propagator of falsehoods online is acting in good faith, responses to disinformation run the risk of inadvertently harming legitimate expression.
The evaluation of these entities and the information they publish appears to be complex. Therefore, it cannot be ruled out that legitimate statements may also fall by the wayside.
Easy access to context and a diverse set of perspectives are key to providing users with the information they need to form their own views. Our products and services expose users to numerous links or videos in response to their searches, which maximizes the chances that users are exposed to diverse perspectives or viewpoints before deciding what to explore in depth.
Here, Google emphasizes that they by no means allow just one tunisia phone number data opinion, but want to show users as many perspectives on a topic as possible in order to support their own opinion formation.
Our work to address disinformation is not limited to the scope of our products and services. Indeed, other organizations play a fundamental role in addressing this societal challenge, such as newsrooms, fact-checkers, civil society organizations, or researchers.
It is pointed out here that Google not only relies on its own resources and algorithms, but also works with external organizations such as newsrooms, fact-checkers, civil social organizations and researchers to verify the accuracy of information.
Partnering with Poynter’s International Fact-Checking Network (IFCN) , a nonpartisan organization gathering fact-checking organizations from the United States, Germany, Brazil, Argentina, South Africa, India, and more.
Here Google is a little more specific and names Poynters' Fact Checking Network as a partner, which is made up of organizations from America, Germany, Brazil, Argentina and South Africa, India... A look at the Google Fact Check Explorer gives a first impression of which German organizations play a role. Correctiv and Presseportal are very active here, among others. Here is a screenshot from the tool on the topic of "Corona":