Google has been making one mistake after another this year. It's too bad, really.

I honestly don't 'get it'--why would weblogs be included in the google news index?

Aren't they either bunches of links (instapundit, scripting news) interspersed with some content or otherwise content that's hardly shaping the world? What do they add that I'd want to see on a news front page?

I would consider alot of weblogs to be news sources. But, they're mostly highly opinionated and biased and, put to the same scrutiny that most journalist are put to, they wouldn't stand up very well. Also, weblogs just tend to muck up everything Google wants to do. (Which is ironic that they now own Blogger.)

But the question is then why are they allowing satirical articles to pass as normal news articles? These would seem to be on par with the same level of credibility as most low-end blogs.

They are opinionated, indeed, but I noticed a few months ago that Google had some entirely ridiculous "source" listed - a satirical one. So I wrote them and asked them their reasoning. Then I asked them to add one of my blogs, as I deemed it just as newsworthy.

The response was, simply, "We don't add sources edited by one person; if you had multiple columnists, we would consider it."

So there you go. Get 5 of your college buddies together, write some jokes, and you've got a Google News source.

I asked about four months ago about my weblog at the BBC being listed in Google News - and it was rejected.

We're talking here about one of the biggest news organisations in the world, and they knocked us back.

I'd like to add that this page is a news source, according to Google News:

Yo momma so fat

Really. I wrote them and am awaiting a reply to understand how a bulletin board for 13-year-olds constitutes a news source.