"Disinformation" existed way before social media. Except it spread through your physical social circle. Which arguable might make it even more potent, because hearing something from a friend face-to-face might make you much more likely to believe it.

The speed of spread might have been slower, that is an argument to make. But to suggest disinformation is a recent issue is ridiculous.

And what exactly is disinformation? To me it looks like every "twisted truth" of people on the opposite end of your political views is disinformation, whereas when you're own side does it it's creative truth telling. I find it absolutely ridiculous when some politician claims the other side is lying, it is the most ridiculous hypocrisy from professional liars on both sides. There is not a politician out there who has not selectively used statistics, or outright lied. Where do you draw the line?

So from a practical perspective, what exactly are social networks to do? How do you define truth? How do you define where each side slips into disinformation vs marketing? For that matter, at what point does advertising become disinformation?

I really think this is an impossible problem to solve, because humans do everything on a sliding scale, nothing is black and white in terms of communication.