Effect of Disputed Warnings and Source Salience on Perceptions of Fake News
papers.ssrn.com
papers.ssrn.com
Teaching people how to think critically is the answer, informing people early about not believing everything you read and hear on TV or the Internet (wait, does internet get capitalized still, i forget..) Fact checking services, "official sources" and certifying things is just a way to filter information and limit available data. People need to be taught how to research and collect facts, weigh them and come up with their own answers, no amount of fact checking is going to eliminate lies.
What is the problem with this? Well, lets use the example of what Googles CEO said that "more than one answer/result to a search is a bug or flaw".. really? See the problem with in this thinking? In Googles future, anyone who is attempting to gather information is only going to get what their algorithm deems “the correct answer”.. ? Do you see the problem yet? How about a news site that is 100% certified accurate by ABX fact checking service which is registered with the US Gov and regulated and swears that they validate authenticity within .010mf (that is "milli-factoids", a patent pending measurement of reliable information) I am certain you could feel confident that everything is on the up and up, right? Do you see now? All this garbage could be eliminated by educating people, however, that is not the purpose of this “fake news” narrative.
Information is power and there was a time when it was reserved to just some people, now it is everywhere and unstoppable, people cannot be as easily lied to and deceived. The mainstream news is caught almost daily. The truth will always be the truth, it doesn’t take all kinds of theories, processes, flowcharts and certifications to back up, those are usually the lies.
Its pretty clear, we don't want people to think. We want to create subservient pseudo-automatons.