[anonytrary]

Any possible situation? Of course there is. This one? Highly unlikely. There's no way Google cares enough about this guy to lie about him. Apparently, they don't even care enough about him to fix the error in their search result. Poor guy, he's in the "famous but not famous enough" valley.

[daveFNbuck]

But the question that's been asked 3 times now in this thread is what it would take for Google to be considered lying. If I don't establish that, how can we discuss whether this qualifies?

[anonytrary]

I feel like we're beating a dead horse at this point. If someone at Google intentionally modified the result output to say X where X is false, then that would be considered lying.

[daveFNbuck]

Would you consider it lying if someone at Google reviewed his request, understood it to be true, and then did not change the incorrect information?

[anonytrary]

I think you know what I'm gonna say. No, it's not "lying". Stop using that word, or look up the definition already. Use a better word like "negligence".

[daveFNbuck]

I honestly thought you were going to agree that this would be a lie. I thought you were saying lies are about knowingly spreading a falsehood. Once someone at Google has verified that it's false, how does its continued spread not become a lie in the same way that it would be if that person wrote the untrue statement?