|Changes to Google News Archive||Marco H.||8/19/11 3:14 PM|
We recently removed the Google News Archive search page and redirected it to the News advanced search page where you can search through News Archives along with the entire News index. News Archives -- comprised of both scanned and digital articles from more than a month to hundreds of years old -- continue to be fully searchable.
You can search through News Archives in News search and Google.com News mode search. To restrict Google News searches to show archives-only, click on the Archives link on the left navigation bar of news search results pages. To go back in time to periods of interest, narrow your searches by specific dates.
You can continue to do advanced searches through Google News and Google News Archives here: news.google.com/news/advanced_news_search
If you’d like to browse old newspapers, you can also find a list of historical archives here:
We appreciate your interest in historical newspaper content and Google News Archives.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||pgudmunson||8/19/11 4:57 PM|
So if we want to learn about a something that happened in the past, we have to already know the date that thing happened.
Kinda defeats the purpose, Toni.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||8/22/11 10:09 AM|
No you can't do some of the things claimed above.
• One can't search by 100 results in the News Archive search, unless one begins a 100 results a page search in Advanced Search and then clicks News at the top and then clicks the Archives selection on the left side. There is no other way to do this.
• One cannot access the archive news files in the Advanced News search. It will only go back three months. I should add if you want to do Advanced News searches "by date" order, you will have to click that selection every time you do a new search unless, again, you begin in Advanced Search to begin with. Then it will stay as "by date" each search without reverting to default settings.
• One can no longer search by individual newspaper title name. Not for archived files. And if you try putting the name as one of the search variables, you find that the title at tops of pages is not seemingly indexed. Few if any pages show up.
• If you go to the newspaper holdings listings, there is no way to access them for searching.
• There is great difficulty in finding other newspaper files. Such as Pro-quest newspapers, News Bank newspapers, etc. I actually at times paid to see a page or article, now very hard to ascertain to make up a group of 3 or 10 articles.
• If you use the date range window that is given below the archive files choice on the left (which must be done before clicking the News Archive link), one discovers that very little seems there that used to be there. Or it is not working very well.
• I am particularly unsure if current newspaper sources that are pay services, like some I can access through my local library, are truly searchable using the regular search engines. For one thing they might appear on the 30th page of results, if they are searchable. Why are you intent on making your search engine a dumbing down device. That it forces 10 results a page as default is already outrageous. Valuable parts of search engines are abandoned without explanation and very rare is it when something actually valuable, and not just frivolous, is added. I would like to see a cost-benefit analysis that shows how much that abandoned News Archive search page could possbly have really cost you people.
You should sell it to Bing. If one believed your rhetoric when you announced the archive project, one should condemn you for not just abandoning it, but burying its usefullness as a research tool.
• And don't direct me to Library of Congress which archive different newspapers entirely, and only up through 1922, or other extremely expensive pay servies like Proquest. I do subscribe to newspaperarchive.com, but those are completely different newspapers as well. By the way yours was a quirky interface but better than the rest. A shame you dropped the ball.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||8/22/11 10:12 AM|
P.S.- Public Relations people should stick to their field. This one evidently knows absolutely nothing about good research techniques or even how research is done, and particularly zero about historical research.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||projectgreywolf||8/22/11 3:21 PM|
Just put it back as it was.
It's a real loss to researchers.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Grano Salis||8/23/11 6:06 AM|
I do not find an "Archives" link on the left navigation bar of news search results pages. It is gone, and I cannot conceive what you intend to accomplish by saying otherwise. I cannot find any combination of advanced search options or context that returns anything other than the recent results returned by the regular search. Your statement that archives continue to be fully searchable is inexplicable.
Don't be evil.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||projectgreywolf||8/23/11 7:30 AM|
It's a shame that now, having had to go through all the hassle of what is laughingly called "the interface" that upwards of 80% of articles are now pay per view.
I'm afraid that's it for me and google. I'm off to Bing to see if they act as stupidly as you have.
Put the damn ed thing back the way it was.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Dana1953||8/23/11 8:48 AM|
I have never posted to this forum until today, although I've been using Google since the beginning and the Archived News since the month it was first offered. And although I eventually discovered the answer to why I cannot access the archives via the old interface (OR the less efficient ones) VIA a Google search, I'm not pleased with the company today. The search interface was far from perfect, but it was better than what's there now - NONE! I accept that Google decided to not add to the database of archived newspapers (don't like it, but accept it), but this doesn't make sense. Apparently, the archived news feature wasn't known to many, but whose fault was that? Others in this and the other discussion thread that lead me here mentioned that there were ways to promote usage or support it (advertising or a nominal charge to users to access the archives, for example), so why make it inaccessible ('archive' is no longer a choice on the side bar menu of advanced search, and you get squat if you enter older dates into the advanced search data range fields - also noted by others here). Earlier in this thread luckyshow said it all, so I would like to piggyback on that with a "yeah - what he/she said!" One last thought: by profession I am a researcher, so "the hunt" is in my blood, but the archived news database isn't something I accessed for work. I really enjoyed mining the archives in my spare time, not just looking for personal or family "stuff" (not a die-hard genealogist, either). Often, it was the article or ad that was adjacent to what I was originally searching for that caught my eye, my attention - it was like taking a trip in a time machine and waaaay better than wasting an hour watching a bunch of idiots dance with stars. I learned something old every time I visited the archives. Google, if you're listening, use that for a tagline to promote the Archived News. Just bring it back, please.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Grano Salis||8/23/11 9:22 AM|
Searching by date is not working at Google Books either, see "date range search is not working in google books..." (http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/books/thread?tid=4c0854cd84df5459).
Someone has screwed up big time.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||projectgreywolf||8/23/11 11:43 AM|
Is anyone at Google Listening?
Put it back or explain, sensibly, why you went ahead and broke something that DID NOT NEED FIXING!
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||pgudmunson||8/23/11 6:58 PM|
It's an affront to learning. It's a proactive assault upon knowledge and all those who wish to acquire it.
If there is anyone at Google who has the capacity for shame, you must be feeling it right now. I BEG you, please do something about this.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Griffin_Mill||8/23/11 11:35 PM|
Sorry, but this is a blatant lie, Google. At least when you're outside the US you get NOTHING from the archive search. Simple one word searches from 1910 to 1970 always end with "Your search did not match any documents".
To me at least it seems that you completely removed the newspaper achive and are afraid to tell the truth about it. Either that or noone at your firm is beta-testing your chances. This is ridiculous. Like one commentator before me said:
Put it back to how it was. There is not a single reason why this new search should be any better (even if it was working)
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||pawana||8/24/11 12:50 AM|
don't do that please.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||detritusmaximus||8/24/11 7:15 AM|
Google...please...we expect much better from you than this!
To reduce or eliminate a previously-existing service is tantamount to taking food right off our plates!
While I'm sure it must have been a daunting task at first to make available as many newspapers archives as possible to the general public, it is completely wrong to arbitrarily pull the plug on everyone the way you have.
A solution exists: put it back the way it was, or hand it over to another provider.
Please do the right thing.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Sports_Realist||8/24/11 11:06 AM|
Toni H, contrary to your comments, the Google News Archives are not fully searchable. The search engine has had its functionality and core features ripped right out of it. Searching is now much more difficult than before and brings back fewer results, that is if you get any results at all.
Why was this change, which is equivalent to a slap in the face of Google News Archives' users, implemented in the first place?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||pgudmunson||8/24/11 12:47 PM|
Is anyone able to get the "Sort by Date" function to work?
Any query I enter, I only get 10 pages of results. When you get to page 10 and hit Next, it just reloads page 10.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Marco H.||8/24/11 2:12 PM|
When doing your search on Google News, make sure that you click on the 'Archives' link on the left-hand navigation bar. You'll then be able to further narrow searches by specific time periods from within the navigation bar itself by selecting the 'Custom range' option and entering a range. Note that you'll need to have selected 'Archives' at some point in the process for these results to pop up.
If you're on a tablet, you'll be able to select for News Archives using the search options below the search bar after you've entered a search query. For example:
1. Enter your search term and click 'search'
2. Find the 'Any Time' button and select it
3. A scrollable set of buttons will appear. Scroll to the right and find 'Archives'
If you are on the desktop version of Google News and don't see the 'Archives' link after have entered a search term and clicked on the 'Search' button, head over to the thread linked at the bottom of this message where we're currently tracking the issue.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Sports_Realist||8/24/11 2:21 PM|
Toni, depending on the computer I use and the browser and OS within it, I often don't see the "archive" link at all. Even then, when using the "archives" when it is available in the far left column, the "custom range" option often turns up far fewer results in less easily sortable formats than the old search function.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Swine the Mad||8/24/11 4:02 PM|
Add me in as someone disgusted by the changes in the search functionality of Google News Archives. The custom range does not turn up as many results, either by me manually inputting dates before I search or after searching without date limits. In fact, using the exact search phrase and typing in a date range before and after getting results, I got four different answers using Internet Explorer and Firefox. Of course, there are less results than the old search engine.
I can live with some newspapers missing huge chunks (such as the Montreal Gazette for the second half of 1949) if Google truly wants to abandon the project. But I'll be saddened if what's left goes to waste.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||mjprigge||8/24/11 5:08 PM|
This change is awful. There was NOTHING wrong with the old search page. As a student working on an MA in history, it is imperative that I have access to the search engine for the news archives. I am eight months into a two-year research project and I might as well be working in the 1990s now that I cannot keyword search these archives. The opportunity for new research using a keyword search of old newspapers is unimaginable. If Google wishes to crown itself as the modern-day guardians of information I have no qualms. But please, for the love of God, make the information accessible. Screw these questions about left-hand search bars and operating system and tablets and blah-blah-blah. Just put the old page back up!
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||mjprigge||8/24/11 5:27 PM|
And yes, in other browsers, the archives are "searchable" in the way you described. However, the location search does not work, there is no way to sort the article by pay and free to view, and the handy timeline bar is nowhere to be found. Can you at least explain WHY this change was made? Using such an immense amount of print material under the banner of fair use leaves you with certain obligations to the community of people who use this material.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Griffin_Mill||8/25/11 12:13 AM|
Sorry, Toni. I'm trying everything you guys say for a week now and still no results. Neither from the advanced search menu nor from klicking the Archives button. This is not a user error, it's on your side
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||athegreat||8/25/11 10:32 AM|
I am very disappointed in Google. The old Archive Search worked just perfectly and importantly (for me) was able to sort by free and paid. Why scrap it?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||agq123||8/25/11 11:32 AM|
What happened to Google's 'focus on the user'?
“The perfect search engine,” says co-founder Larry Page, “would understand exactly what you mean and give back exactly what you want.”
1. Focus on the user and all else will follow.
Since the beginning, we’ve focused on providing the best user experience possible.
I think this change goes against Google Principle #1. The new search engine gives me back nothing.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Harvey P.||8/26/11 10:07 AM|
I'm really sorry to hear this change has caused so much frustration. I assure you our team has heard your feedback and will continue to work to make Google News Archive search more useful for your search needs.
You might want to try searching from the link posted below. Here you'll also see a full list of publications included in Google News Archive and be able to browse by publication. When you conduct a search from this page, you'll be able to set a custom date range on the following search results page. Look for "Custom Range..." in the lower part of the left hand column.
As always, we appreciate your patience as we work to sort through these issues.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Harvey P.||8/26/11 10:08 AM|
Ooops!... Somehow the link didn't get included in the that last post. Check it out below.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Sports_Realist||8/26/11 12:16 PM|
Harvey, I appreciate the thought and effort, but the link you provided is essentially useless.
You can't filter by newspaper, date, pay/free articles or by other filters.
I just did a search for which the relevant results would be roughly between 1976 and 1986 and got back results from as recently as two weeks ago.
Without the old advanced search function and timeline bar, the link only leads to an unsortable stack containing thousands upon thousands of newspapers.
I clicked "no" in response to the query of whether or not the answer was helpful.
Why was the old advanced search function and timeline removed? Can it be restored?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Grano Salis||8/26/11 12:34 PM|
Harvey, the news.google.com/newspapers page is not useful unless one knows in advance which newspaper contains the news one is looking for. Even so, when I select a newspaper and search for an article known to be there (as identified in the "No 'archive' option in the left hand column" topic), clicking "Search Archive" adds "&tbs=nws:1,ar:1&source=newspapers" to the URL but returns the same results as the regular news search, with nothing from the archives. And please note: there is no "Custom Range..." option in the lower part of the left hand column.
Several of us are telling you that we do not see the "Archives" option you are telling us to use. Discussion suggests that the problem may involve browser dependencies. Have you referred the matter to someone who is qualified to investigate technical issues? Harvey, are you, or are you not authorized to do so?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Inelastic||8/28/11 11:54 AM|
the google timeline was PERFECT! There is no other situation where I actually read the news for fun! for research, writing, and information discovery this tool was priceless. Why in the world it would be removed is not my concern, but what I can do to get it back is.
Google, I'm here to help, let me know how.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||sjamo||8/28/11 6:54 PM|
Please bring back the old format! I'm also finding now that when I use the new format it is not searching old articles at all now- even when I enter a date range. It has become completely pointless!
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||tonetone71||8/29/11 11:05 PM|
why fix something that wasnt even broken. I loved using the archives. please put it back
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Jeff01||8/30/11 4:29 PM|
I had been using the old timeline while researching places in the US and I was surprised to see that Google has taken the old timeline search away. I tried selecting archives but I'm not getting all of the results that I did with the old timeline. Even when selecting the range for the year that I know the article was in it's not bringing it up. It's frustrating because before I was able to find a lot of information on various topics but now I cannot even find the articles that I had found before even when using the same search term.
Reading through the posts here it shows that a lot of people were using it so why remove it?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Jeff01||8/30/11 4:52 PM|
I found one thing while messing around with the search. If you type source:"name of newspaper" after the search term it'll bring up only results from that newspaper. You have to select archives for it to work though.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||yallaman||8/31/11 6:41 PM|
Toni, you're an idiot. It doesn't work at all like you claim. Obviously you're spouting the party line, but you guys have screwed the old system up but good. I'm so disappointed in Google. Corporate greed and games wins again.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||yallaman||8/31/11 6:43 PM|
In other words, put the damn thing back the way it was, dingbat.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||kinquests||9/2/11 6:20 PM|
Glad I'm not the only one who is upset with this change. When google first made the change, you could at least access the historical newspapers and do some searches. It was not an improvement, and I'm with the folks who say "if it isn't broke, don't fix it." But now you can't access these papers through searching at all. The only way I can seem to get any of these papers is to copy an old link for an article that I saved and then browse the newspapers. It's really ridiculous. And that workaround doesn't let me access any historical papers that I hadn't yet searched. I really don't understand why they did this. Find a provider who will take over these newspapers and let folks who are interested in searching them have access to them.
I must say ever since they changed leadership at google, their entire product line had deteriorated - all the focus is on social networking and forget the other services that researchers enjoyed using.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||kinquests||9/2/11 6:34 PM|
Ok http://news.google.com/newspapers does work a little bit - at least I can search the old newspapers now - but certainly not as good as the old format. I'm with the folks who liked the time line - doing a search and then clicking on results by decade was a really nice option.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||kinquests||9/2/11 7:45 PM|
Lol - http://news.google.com/newspapers - well that was short-lived - within an hour that link stopped working. Using the exact same search I used an hour ago now results in nothing.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||detritusmaximus||9/3/11 6:11 AM|
Well, Google Archives, it seems the ball is now clearly in your court considering the avalanche of complaints regarding the recent "tweaking" of your newspaper archive service.
Why do I get the feeling that there's more to this than you're telling us?
I can't believe that researchers like myself are once again going to be banished to library microfilm spools!
You opened up a door for us which was most definitely needed and long-awaited, and now you are virtually slamming it shut right in our faces!
C'mon...it was a bad move and you know it, so please restore Google Archives to what it was and should be.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||projectgreywolf||9/3/11 6:14 AM|
Disgusting, not a single answer from Google on Why this act of vandalism occurred, or whether they are going to Listen and PUT IT BACK!
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||ryanc257||9/6/11 4:31 PM|
I'd just like to say that I too find these changes extremely disappointing and frustrating. The old system with timeline was excellent and I used it frequently for research. The new system is awful and I cannot find things at all any more. Why on earth has it been changed in such a detrimental way? Like the other people above, I ask that you please restore the excellent and innovative news archive system that was so well-liked by so many people.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||mjprigge||9/6/11 4:47 PM|
There now appears to be a semi-usuable archive search option on the news search page. However, it cannot be used in IE, and even using it in Opera (the search results do come up), when clicking an article, you are taken to the correct issue, but not the correct article, and browsing through the paper to find the correct article is pretty hit and miss. Usually, the image of the article that you are looking for does not appear. Also, when zooming in/out, the page you are looking at will randomly change.
It is getting closer, I suppose. I am glad to see something is being done about it, anyway. Seems like a lot of effort when the old system, as far as from the user's end, worked just fine.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Daniel1111||9/12/11 6:57 AM|
Please please please, can you put it back to the way it was? That was perfect!!! The timeline was wonderful and I could access the articles I wanted, and yes there were also a lot of articles that I had to pay for, but I bought them and that was it. Now I can't access nothing. I used it almost daily and I'm starting to get really depressed now. Please google can you put it back????
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||OrwellJames||9/12/11 3:29 PM|
I can understand Google's move to consolidate the two databases into one, although I'm disappointed by it given that Google News and Google News Archive served very different purposes. But if consolidating them will streamline Google's operations a bit and improve user discovery of the archives, then I'd prefer that to dropping them entirely. I hope more people will dig through the archives now.
What I don't understand is why the Timeline was abandoned - this was an innovative tool in typical Google fashion that completely changed the way I did certain types of research, particularly for school. It was a great way to gain a high-level understanding of companies, people, countries, etc by picking out the most important news articles over the years or to evaluate trends over time.
Although Google Trends certainly has some overlapping functionality, as you all at Google know it can only search specific phrases, so for searches that require more flexibility or are too specific to generate significant search volumes, Trends cannot quite do the trick. Timeline was really the only tool out there.
And that's what is most shocking - Google appears to have abandoned a service for which, as far as I'm aware, there was not and is not any competing service. When you abandoned your real estate listings, it was understandable because Zillow, Trulia, and others offered highly focused, similar services. As far as Timeline goes, I have nowhere else to go for this now and, while I will continue to use Google News in the same manner as I always did, I won't be able to use it for the same purposes as I did Google News Archive.
I hope that this is just a temporary change while you continue to integrate the services, and I really hope that you (Google) will tell us that you already have plans to bring back the Timeline in the near future. But in case you're not, I wanted to make sure to get my opinion out there because I think this is a big loss for us all because this was a great tool that I think could help many arrive at fresh, big ideas.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||sawyergarpy||9/19/11 6:35 PM|
Toni's answer is a complete lie. Google has made the archive search virtually useless. Why did they bother to digitize all these
newspapers just to make search a joke. Without the Timeline archival searching is a complete waste of time- Google's decision is
unfathomable - is it just to make more money in paid results. Google gets more evil every day
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||HPHJanni||9/23/11 2:59 PM|
News archive and realtime search WITH Timeline are deeply missed...
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||MWinDC||9/25/11 12:20 PM|
Hi i am trying to search, as you suggested, in the News search, choosing the archives, selecting a custom range. I have done several searches, and am getting results BUT CANNOT RETRIEVE RESULTS AFTER PAGE 10 OF RESULTS. click on 11, get same page, click on NEXT, get same page. page 10.;
This has to be something that can be fixed...
i am really disappointed about the news archive search. why did you scan all those newspapers and then trash the search? Maybe someone else will take it on. Nickolson Baker?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||cmw4now||9/26/11 7:57 AM|
This is a major dissapointment. Just when I learned about how great the news archive was, it has been rendered virtually useless to me. What were you thinking? In a world of nothing but facebook and other useless dribble for the genealogists, I have stayed loyal to Google. Now I feel betrayed.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||nettopsey||9/27/11 5:12 AM|
I have to say I agree with most of the technical issues raised here. There are issues of browser dependency. It no longer seems possible to search for specific archived papers. Searches return no results when we know from previous experience that results are there. There are issues searching specific date ranges. The Timeline view was very helpful and should be restored. I realize that the top brass have decided to focus on your core business, but search is part of your core business. What Google has done to the news archive search indicates that Google doesn't care about search, or at least not search that doesn't make them enough money, which leads us, your users, to believe that Google has become just another big faceless corporation that doesn't care about its users, just its shareholders. Overall, the new News Archive Search is almost worse than useless for the quality of results it generates and the difficulty in making it work even a little.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Sports_Realist||9/29/11 9:12 AM|
Toni, Harvey, you two have gone quiet. What gives? Can you provide some information about why the changes happened and what is being done to mitigate the damage these changes caused? Right now it's just posters talking in a vacuum. We want to hear from someone at Google.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||marmosetman||10/11/11 3:22 PM|
A google posted here that if we search from the "all newspapers" page, then we'd be able to set a custom date range on the search results page:
"When you conduct a search from this page, you'll be able to set a custom date range on the following search results page. Look for "Custom Range..." in the lower part of the left hand column."
BS. There is no "custom range" in the left nav. Only a "sort by date" function, which is worthless because ALL THE SEARCH RESULTS ARE DATED Dec 31, 1969.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Ludie2||10/13/11 8:05 PM|
Dear Google...please, please, please restore the old News Archive Search with Timeline. It was wonderful and is sorely missed! Also, please reconsider the abandonment of digitally copying old newspapers. You just can't know how helpful this service is...even if we have pay, we will!!!! There is no other service for us to turn to...
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||pgudmunson||10/24/11 4:47 PM|
I'm disgusted with how this turned out. You should be ashamed of yourselves.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||josheman||10/31/11 5:00 AM|
The Search Timeline was one of the best things we had every used! As experts on inter-cultural intelligence we could produce timelines of cultural events, like the sacking of Olympus CEO Michael Woodford over a combination of cultural, governance, and corporate factors, at the click of a button: the headlines would tell almost the whole story from start to finish.
We would be so happy to see the timeline feature come back, even if we had to pay for it as part of a Google Apps account.
Please make it a priority to keep things going when you have the best tool in the world for something! I believe your Timeline search was best in class: like search, and (for me) Google Docs, it had a halo effect over your whole enterprise. Without it there is that much less of it.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||nwlilac||11/3/11 7:16 AM|
Oh Google! Timeline was the most efficient and valuable tool on the web! That is gone, is heartbreaking to me, and I don't think what you have put in its place comes anywhere close, as all the comments above have addressed.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||magnolia s||11/7/11 3:11 PM|
I hate to say it, but Google you really suck these days. Your "new and improved" awful re-design of the news archive is totally useless now.
I am no longer able to filter articles by date AND by price, so it's a total fail.
Google, you are screwing up left and right. If you actually Google my user name, you will see how much of a lover of your services I was. I vowed I'd never go back to Microsoft but Bing is sounding better and better to me every single day.
I don't know what happened to you, but you lost your way.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Floydian||11/11/11 9:37 AM|
Threads like this just prove how Google is like a kid sticking its fingers in its ears and going "LALALALALA NOPE ALL IS WELL LALALALALA"
WE WILL NEVER BACKTRACK EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Good for you Google. I wish we all had billions of dollars to live in Lala land like your thinktank.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||kch1000||11/24/11 2:47 PM|
The advanced search tool for archives that worked so well is gone. With the new system none of the results that I used to find are there anymore. Google, please give us a link to the old system.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||SamanthaEquus||11/28/11 7:12 AM|
I agree... PLEASE put the news one click on the top as it was. Now when I search for dog stories, say, I used to be able to click news, and I'd get dog stories, dog rescues in the news. Now I get the world news...totally unrelated, unhelpful, and useless! We need speed and time for school research, not more steps, so I'm back at Yahoo for that until this is fixed. Please listen to us....why fix what worked as others said..
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||caughtinheadlights||12/1/11 5:08 AM|
Please please please put the "sort by date" function back. Without it, google news search is virtually useless. Will have to find an alternative news search engine now, when the previous one was unparalleled on the web. A real shame.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Vox Sciurorum||12/1/11 2:09 PM|
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||pfinuca||12/13/11 5:05 PM|
Not good. The Free Only / Paid switch comes and goes at random. And you can go pass the 10th page. Try searching the 1940s for Free Only archives... you can't. Because either the Free Only link goes away or the date section goes away. And sort by date starts newest to oldest, and you can page back to the 1940s. It is like Google built a machine in order to frustrate people. You know there are results, but you can't get to them...
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||12/16/11 10:37 AM|
Now the regular Advanced NEws Search no longer exists, so even for modern, new news, one is stuck with their obnoxious 10 resultsa page and no more.
So asking that the useless Advanced News search page they have now with no way to sort by individual newspaper or date, only allows 10 a page which is almost useless to me. As it is the page is pretty pointless as it is now. I still am baffled that a cost benedit analysis showed low numbers. First, did they really figure out the pay-per-view usage due to it? Since this may be impossible to figure out, the answer would be no. And exactly how did leaving that search in place cost anything?
They never have given any logical reason and ignore us because real researchers are evidently a small minority. I hate Google now. I never had before. I used the news archive search every day and now it is really gone. They should stop sending people where it won't work. And stop eliminating everything or Bing, even Hotbot, will be preferable.
I never despised Google, but do now. They are losers with no integrity. They have abandoned their mission and ignore us like the worst internet companies.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||ContactWC||12/18/11 11:26 PM|
Are you serious?!?!? you guys should be ashamed for taking away such a valuable tool that CLEARLY everyone here used. Do you SERIOUSLY not feel the bullet hole that you shot in your foot? come on just read every dang old comment on this page then think to yourself, " if i was a business and customers were asking for a service we discontinued, would you not be smart enough to bring it back? or would you lose the customer?" seems like you lost some customers smartguys<----- condescendingly said
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||ContactWC||12/18/11 11:31 PM|
For some reason they have no shame in this stupid deal.... seriously everyone on this page is angry at this and they still haven't brought it back! I learned so much history that probably has not even been categorized, books that i otherwise would never have stumbled on i have found with timeline dating back to the 11th century and now what... they are pathetic
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||ContactWC||12/18/11 11:36 PM|
You obviously did not get the page full of notes that says you guys haven't figured it out but HAD IT figured out then you discontinued google timeline. Just bring it back and stop horsing around like your trying to fix what you already had working. You guys either move slower than molasses or you guys are s.o.l. with all of us google users who are very not angry but pissed that you took this away and haven't a scruple about yourselves
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||ContactWC||12/18/11 11:37 PM|
Actually it worked perfect for everyone that saw this post about google taking away timeline... they are just idiots... im gone to bing
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||NiteShadow||12/29/11 9:03 PM|
Why can we apparently no longer see more than about 100 results in the archive search? When I did a search today, it said that there were 437 results, but I was only able to see 100 of those. I first had my page default set to 50 but could only go to page 2 out of several. I then changed my default to 100 but couldn’t even get to page 2 then :(
First you stop digitizing old newspapers altogether (I understand but that's a huge loss for a lot of us), then you take away the Timeline, then remove the newspaper Archives search from the Advanced News Search options, and also make it harder to even find the archived newspapers.
Google, please, please put the Newspaper Archives search back to the way it used to be. I use the newspaper search on a regular basis for genealogy and it's allowed me to find a lot of things that I wouldn't have been able to otherwise, minus flying across the country to search in libraries where the files needed are stored (for which I thank you). The digitized Newspaper Archives were a godsend to those like me that do genealogy, or anyone that does historical research. But now searching them has become much harder to do. The Timeline allowed us to truly narrow down the results to very specific timeframes that the 'new' Google News can't and doesn't do. And being able to access the advanced options, such as inputting a newspaper's name in the 'source' field, also worked very well to narrow down searches to specific papers. But now you can't really search through a specific newspaper any more, which makes it much harder to find the content that you're looking for.
Please listen to your users. Can't you see that we're literally begging you to make this truly usable for us once again? Thank you.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||12/30/11 12:07 AM|
Google does not care about actual research. They want to just serve the simpleton. Or rather, I should say, the lowest common denominator.
At least in my Firefox browser, I find it near impossible to set my search preferences for 100 hits a page. When I go to the options page it shows up as an error almost every time and reverts to their childish instant nonsense with only 10 hits allowed a page. And the same problem with stopping well before you get to search past a set number of pages means you can't get to the m all. It is another flaw in Google that they just won't do anything about or respond to. It seems with these techies that they only respond when they have an answer. And they just don't here. They are exactly the opposite of how they portrayed themselves. They can care less about good research, about detail , about integrity of research. Google are just money-grubbing phonies.
Part of the dumbing down of us all.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||12/30/11 12:13 AM|
...and I also assume that if the Google search preferences page doesn't work in Firefox then not enough will use it (it is almost a secret as it is, very hard to know about or locate), that eventually they will do one of their cock-and-bull "cost-benefit" analysis and say no one uses it and they are losing money on it (exactly how the advanced news archive page cost anything at all is all fictitious anyway, isn't it?) and eliminate the options.
Google can care less if we avoided them. We are too smart for their new demographic which seems to be about Google+ which is just another social network thumb-sucking endeavor...
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||corolla||12/30/11 11:25 PM|
Add the disablement of the zoom/magnifying feature to the destruction of the newspaper archive. Even when a needed page is found, when trying to zoom in on a section, Google has broken the image into unusable fragments so that content can't be viewed. Google - what's wrong with you people?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||ms.sandy.miller||1/2/12 6:42 PM|
Good thing I did not throw out the microfilm in my library. First, Google has people rely on google instead of libraries for information and then they tank the information that people relied upon. This is a very scary precedent as many public libraries have begun to throw out microfilm because "everything is online". I wish that the Library of Congress was a primary digitizers and not a private company. People are relying on technology to save information but what is really happening is that much of our history will be thrown away as tech heads decide what to keep and what to throw out. I was really beginning to think that Google would be a useful tool for future historians but I now doubt that. All the future will have, are the blogs and tweets of people like Ashton Kucher....what a sad fate.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||ms.sandy.miller||1/2/12 6:45 PM|
It also seems to me that no one from Google actually reads these posts because I have not seen any responses. The timeline feature does need to come back, they need to stop hiding Google Advanced search at the bottom of the page and Google News Archives needs to come back. That is, if Google really cares about information.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||1/2/12 7:22 PM|
When you do sometimes come across a result, a newspaper page, it seems sometimes it no longer exists as a link. They have already discarded it. It brings up a bad link page.
I love the way I read in the New York Times Business section a front page article on Goog;e's change of direction, its repositioning in its marketing, etc. Not one mention whatsoever above any of the dumbing don of their search engines and this abandonment of a principaled syand on historic preservation. Libraries that throw out microfilm are just as derelict of duty. The medium lasts for almost forever and the format will always exist. It was already annoying all the pay-per-view pages I'd come across. Now I have no adequate way to locate these.... None of this was in the article. They take at face value that the changes are positive, that their search mission is strengthened now...
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||NiteShadow||1/4/12 5:32 PM|
Agreed! The zoom feature is badly broken lately. When you try to zoom in, instead of it working like it should ans zooming smoothly to the chosen area and giving you a larger, clear picture, instead it gives you what seems to be fragments of that page or pages all jumbled together and over each other. Since Google doesn't seem to be listening to us, I don't even know if reporting it would do any good :(
I have found a sort of work around, if it helps anyone. On the page that you're interested in, move your mouse to one of the clickable areas on that page (or the next page, if there's no clickable area on the page you want) and then click on it. This will zoom the page in without the jumbled mess. Unfortunately, if what you're interested in is not one of those clickable areas, then you'll still have to move the page around a bit to find what you want. But at least it's viewable this way.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||judk1||1/6/12 9:13 PM|
Seems too little, too late, but what's the point in being able to reach a Jan. 5, 1912 Sports page archive if there is now ay that I can copy and print it? Happy to pay for the privilege, but the website offers no help. Where is the Google of yesteryear?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||1/7/12 9:04 AM|
The Google of yesteryear didn't respond either, was almost impossible to contact. This is a conceit that pre-internet, companies didn't have. They could throw your mail out, ignore it or file it forever but they didn't return it and there was an address.
Google is as irresponsible a the worst now, worse than Verizon. I come across newspaper pages in the search engine that come up as gone. No explanations of course....
Those that report on them in the news are like press agents passing along press releases. Reporters know nothing of Google and how ruthless they've become to their core business, their best customers...
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Floydian||3/12/12 8:17 AM|
Google are wankers that press on, full steam ahead, regardless if the passengers have all left ship long ago.
Fuck you Google. Never have clicked one of your ads, never will.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Olly_J||3/21/12 11:19 AM|
I have also experienced this bug. when going through a large set of results (more than 10 pages) i often can see more pages being displayed as available but when I click "next" or directly on the page the results fail to load and the same page is displayed over and over again. Changing the parameter in the url directly results in the same thing.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Olly_J||3/21/12 11:20 AM|
I am running the latest version of chrome on OSX.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Kaushikc||5/23/12 9:22 PM|
This was very useful service. We need it badly.
|chn1971||6/15/12 1:14 AM||<This message has been deleted.>|
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||chn1971||6/15/12 1:15 AM|
In addition to all of the concerns brought up here, I think it would be very useful to add locations with the issue count and dates to the main list of newspapers.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||TomGantert||7/14/12 11:51 AM|
What bothers me the most about all of this? Even more so than losing access to all the newspaper articles of the past? Is that Google has now reached the point where it thinks it can post pure 100 % B.S. and think it's the truth. They pretty much took everything down. They just should admit it and quit pissing on our shoes and calling it rain.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||7/16/12 3:41 PM|
They are far worse now. On the regular new search, list by Date order no longer works. And in the News Archive search I see that they no longer find Hartford Courant Proquest articles, so it is even more useless than I thought it was now. Who knows what else they don't bother with anymore. No wonder they are near silent on these things. All they seem to get is good press for all the frivolous crap they now do.....
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||victorvanrij||10/9/12 3:40 AM|
Some years ago I used the google news timeline for a European project to trace early warning signals in old news articles, using google news timeline which was priceless for the purpose. It really gave an insight in the growing press attention for things that people foresaw and that afterwards really happened or not (by counteracting policies). Also original sources of these signals could be tracked down as well as who was obstructing or stimulating certain developments. I recently found out that google labs closed its shop and also the news timeline as it was, with no proper replacement. It seems that someone does not like the idea that we get an honest view on who did what in history. Any how, google seems to stop to be an advanced thinker on the devlopment of the web - it focuses more and more on "'the commercial use only",mode" ,in which the persuasive pshychology of selling shoul not be stirred up by stories from the past.
|Changes to Google News Archive||JL newszer||1/4/13 7:34 AM|
I can appreciate that the archive search does not generate revenue, but I hope it will continue to be supported. Since working with newspapers on an Android tablet is more difficult in the Android browser than Opera, I wonder if Google would consider creating an app that specifically works with the newspaper archives?
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Marc123456||4/10/13 7:25 AM|
It's totally useless now. Cannot even search by year which is probably the most important access vector.
Lately, as Google tries to be more profitable, it is again demonstrated that useful stuff just isn't commercially important. Google Reader is a terrific app and Google drops it. Google News Archive is one of the best online apps ever and they let it rot.
Please! Move your EOL stuff to independent not-for-profit organizations so that the world can still "profit" from them.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||Nathan Moes||2/5/14 8:13 PM|
You have mentioned that you will "continue to work to make Google News Archive search more useful for your search needs," however it has been nearly 3 years and the issues mentioned by users in 2011 are still unresolved. Are we to put this to bed based upon the lack of actual change?
Google News Archive was an indispensable source history educators in North America and beyond. It's crippled version that still hobbles today is a pale reminder of what it once was.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||victorvanrij||2/17/14 5:26 AM|
Not only in the US
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||TomGantert||2/17/14 5:43 AM|
I think not changing anything in 3 years says it all - they are done with it. That's sad.
|Re: Changes to Google News Archive||luckyshow||2/17/14 6:04 PM|
Google is becoming an anachronism. If the tech press actually knew anything past social media graphic interfacing, they would pinpoint all that Google does to downgrade themselves, try to please a bumbing down population.
How hard is it just to locate the Advanced Search? Then to actually change the options so to get more than 10 results a page? They make this sort of available only to experts who know to even look for such a thing. And now the <cache> is almost useless. Almost never highlighting the results. Amazingly I now use Yahoo search where the cache still is useful in this manner. Yahoo.com!!! If this was reported, if this was widely realized, Google would be laughed at.
So it isn't just the News Archive that has been f-ed up. Actually it is worse as there isn't even the option any more and the date range barely works..
Google sucks, are unprofessional, no longer care about serious research...