Continuing our commentaries with respect to Google Quality Filters and what questions Google asks to assess the quality of a page or an article; I have been addressing a few questions at a time, providing some insight and explanation as appropriate.
In this post, I will raise some talking points as they relate to Article Impartiality. Another questionThe Google Quality Filter uses in the analysis of assessing the page/article quality is:
Does the article describe both sides of a story?
Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar quoted:
“A historian ought to be exact, sincere and impartial; free from passion, unbiased by interest, fear, resentment or affection; and faithful to the truth, which is the mother of history the preserver of great actions, the enemy of oblivion, the witness of the past, the director of the future.”
Whether it is history, describing a story, or composing an article for publication, being impartial will ensure a level playing field, if you will. Simply explained, we take an unbiased stance and/or position – not favoring one side over the other and discussing an opinion accurately and fair.
The Google Search Engine will analyze the credibility of an Article/Webpage based on impartiality – in other words, determining the meaning behind the Article/Webpage.
Might I suggest a few thoughts to consider when composing an impartial article?
- Provide a fair balance of issues and views;
- Include a wide range of opinions and commentary;
- Honesty explore conflicting views;
- Treat each thought equally and not under-represent one thought against another;
- Avoid bias and/or an unbalanced viewpoint.
Our articles need to clearly separate our opinions from the facts. We need to carefully interpret our research; ensure all facts contained therein are respected; and not dilute the meaning of the article by making our opinions too one sided.
Keep in mind, our readers have every right to respond to our articles - they are entitled to agree, disagree, and express their comments, and the diversified range of their perspectives should be given due consideration.
Rather than receiving a disagreement personally, we should view these viewpoints as an angle of understanding and promote constructive debate.
No comments:
Post a Comment