But I feel that the bigger problem is that people want fake news. Most people have a hard time living their everyday lives; fake news which supports their choices and viewpoints is a release, and it makes them feel good. And networks do a good job of surfacing similar content once they gauge one's interests.
- https://thenextweb.com/insider/2012/10/13/wikipedias-dark-si...
- https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/4xangm/wikipedia-editor-s...
- https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2017/02/one-t...
The fact that you can source a piece of information doesn't make it true.
We eat food for breakfast.
Is this statement true or false? You could mark it either way and both could be supported by rational thought! If you don’t come up with a framework for answering first and then evaluate that question within the context of the agreed upon framework the truthiness of the statement will remain subjective.
Keeping people in bubbles is how Facebook keeps people browsing and wasting their time on Facebook. Because people like their bubbles.
But what you can do quite easily is to disallow statements that are factual wrong.
That would solve at least a part of the problem.
If I say things which where already proven wrong, then I can't post them on Ads.
Proven by whom?