In the meticulous world of crossword editing, a recent attempt to verify a simple clue – "Leftmost colour on the French flag" – has highlighted a growing concern with modern online research tools. The editor, relying on Google as a quick sense-check, discovered that the search engine's evolving algorithms are now creating more problems than they solve for fact-checkers.
The Changing Landscape of Online Verification
Just a few years ago, in 2020 for instance, a search for something like "spotted hyena diet" would typically yield a Featured Snippet from a reputable source such as Britannica. With one additional click, an editor could confidently verify the accuracy of information about the unlucky gazelles mentioned. More often than not, these snippets came from authoritative references, and when they didn't, a brief follow-up search would usually lead to reliable sources like Collins or The Guardian.
Google's New Approach: Synthesis Over Source
The current reality presents a different challenge. Rather than directing users toward established, helpful resources, Google now attempts to synthesize information from multiple sources. This makes it significantly harder to trace where individual components originate, undermining the verification process that crossword editors depend upon.
Adding to the confusion, the visual presentation has changed dramatically. Where once there were no images at all in such searches, now there are – but with concerning inaccuracies. The image returned for "french flag" in this instance actually showed the tricolour in reverse order, potentially misleading anyone seeking quick confirmation.
Returning to Traditional Reference Methods
This development suggests a possible return to paper reference books for reliable fact-checking. For verifying something as fundamental as the French flag's correct colour order, one might even consider a trip across the Channel to see the emblem flying in its proper configuration.
Celebrating Cryptic Compiling Milestones
Elsewhere in the puzzling world, two setters deserve recognition for their extraordinary longevity. Richard E Maltby Jr has been contributing to Harper's for an impressive fifty years, while Azed, formerly of this publication, compiled for fifty-four years before retiring. Together, they represent over a century of cryptic expertise.
Musical Themes and Editorial Discoveries
When editing January's Genius puzzle, the perimeter message "DON'T BELIEVE THE HYPE?" initially suggested a celebration of Public Enemy's seminal album It Takes a Nation of Millions to Hold Us Back. However, the actual theme proved to be more contemporary – though still historical in musical terms – focusing on Arctic Monkeys.
The puzzle cleverly incorporated the band's lyrics, with the first and last letters of superfluous words spelling out phrases from their songs: "Perhaps Vampires Is a Bit Strong But" and "I Bet You Look Good on the Dancefloor." The final solution required submitting the name of the Sheffield band's breakthrough album: Whatever People Say I Am, That's What I'm Not.
Cluing Excellence and Community Contributions
The editor extends gratitude for contributions to the CODE cluing conference, where shorter words often inspire particular elegance. The audacity award goes to SwamiPete for the inventive "Dah dit dah dit – dah dah dah – dah dit dit – dit."
Runners-up include Dunnart's technologically-inspired "Python bit crocodile's midsection and tail" and Croquem's intriguing "Secret message opening chapter and verse?" The winning entry proves both clever and plausible: "In the dock, lying about regulations."
Congratulations to Newlaplandes, and readers are invited to submit entries for SLOP below, along with any favourite clues or puzzles they've encountered recently.
188 Words for Rain by Alan Connor is published by Ebury (£16.99).
