The FT reports on a Google paper that would enable the search company to rank more credible sources over ones that are less so.
This sounds, at first flush, like an eminently sensible idea, it would enable the expert to be heard over a generalist with a large following.
However, it does also mean that there would be a mechanism by which the opposite could be achieved or achieved in a selective way. It isn't hard to see how this would give enormous power to the company to sway public opinion by only returning expert opinions with a point of view the company agrees with.
I find myself in the unexpected position of wanting a regulator.
The magazine reported on a Google research paper about how the company might reorder its search rankings to promote sites that could be trusted to tell the truth. (Google produces many such papers a year so this is a long way short of official policy.) It posits a formula for finding and promoting sites with a record of reliability.