Here’s a really great example of why some publishers are getting frustrated with Google; minutes after the Japanese GP finishes this is the search result. Where did Google get these results?

On a laptop these are the only results visible above the fold and there is no credit offered anywhere in the knowledge box at the top, so who told Google that Hamilton had won?

The chances are that it is one of the sites below the fold in which case why not credit them?

It seems that Google can find 31 million search results for Japanese Grand Prix and chooses to show both knowledge and news boxes at the top of the search results.

Granted that might provide a good user experience but why not credit your sources.

Or are they standing by that old aphorism that ‘to copy from one source is plagiarism, but from two or more, that’s research’?