A new study co-authored by an MIT professor shows that crowdsourced judgments about the quality of news sources may effectively marginalize false news stories and other kinds of online misinformation.
I am not a free-speech lawyer, but when human health is at stake, perhaps search engines, social media platforms and websites should be held responsible for promoting or hosting fake information.
Haider Warraich, a fellow in heart failure and transplantation at Duke University Medical Center, is the author of the forthcoming “State of the Heart: Exploring the History, Science, and Future of Cardiac Disease.”
Since US President Donald Trump weaponised the term “fake news” during the 2016 presidential election campaign, the phrase has gone viral.
Increasingly it is used by politicians around the world to denounce or dismiss news reports that do not fit their version of the truth.
But as news outlets defend their work, false information is saturating the political debate worldwide and undermining an already weak level of trust in the media and institutions.
The term has come to mean anything from a mistake to a parody or a deliberate misinterpretation of facts.
At the same time, misinformation online is increasingly visible in attempts to manipulate elections.