Is Google responsible for telling the truth?

Wanted: A truth engine

You might have noticed that when you do a search on Google, you don't always get the same format of results. Sometimes you'll see Ads first, or a local map, or a Flashcard-looking-thing like this:

This is a fairly good, quick--and true--description of thermodynamics. And Google was smart enough to know that I wasn't looking to buy a really snazzy, dynamic thermos. So good job on that one. However, the next result isn't quite as good:

Ah, so here the movie "Gravity" takes full precedence over the scientific concept, Gravity. It's a good movie, I liked the bit with the bookcases and all*, but to me Google fails here to provide truth before advertising. If you type in "gravity definition" then you get the truth about the concept Gravity. 

Google’s search algorithms are somewhat explained here, and if nothing else it makes you realize that the process of filtering out the spam websites is, by itself, a hugely daunting task that Google does a great job with. After the Spam has been filtered then Google has an important decision to make on what to show first: Ads, Popularity, Truth? It makes a big difference what is shown first, and these 3 categories can have totally different top hits. 

After talking with a friend that used to work at Google, he brought up the point that displaying websites with factual information (Truth first) might be perceived by government regulatory agencies as a form of bias. As in, truth might be perceived differently by different people. Nonetheless, since I’m often searching for sciencey stuff -- fact-driven webpages with good summaries and links to research studies -- it's frustrating when Google thinks I'm shopping for lingerie (Wait, that's Facebook that thinks I always want lingerie, they seem to be even further behind the curve). 

But it’s hard to know how all the different search filters play out unless you test how google responds to different searches. Here's two more sad examples: 

When you search for “Evolution” the factual blurb doesn’t pop up and the top results include some conspicuous results. Why not a quick definition here?

Evolution: Populations change over time. 

Would this 4 word definition be so traumatic to display? I somehow think the internet would survive. And I find it strange that no "knowledge card" pops up. 

Here's one more peculiar one:

Aside from the poor sentence structure in the definition for "GMOs" the knowledge card includes a picture of a lime photoshopped with an apple. This is not a GMO or any living organism, just a fabricated image. Here again Google could do much to improve. 

So, that's why it would be great to have a truth engine, a way to distinguish facts from opinions. I’m looking forward to having a button next to “I'm feeling lucky” that says, “I'm feeling truthy” or “I can handle the truth” or some other pithy remark. I have hopes that there are enough sciency-oriented people at Google that they will get there eventually.   

*EDIT: Apparently I was thinking of "Interstellar" when I wrote this. "Gravity" is the one where astronauts are doing Satellite repairs and such. My bad.