Indeed, "computers can't solve it". Software cannot replace fact checking. > In what substantive way is "fake news trying to get you to vote for a particular p

Indeed, "computers can't solve it". Software cannot replace fact checking. > In what substantive way is "fake news trying to get you to vote for a particular politician" different from "fake email trying to get you to buy fake pills"? You don't normally get ham email asking you to buy pills, do you? But you read and share news that has an ideological perspective all the time. Again, the only reliable distinction between true and false news is whether it actually happened. By definition this is not to be found by looking at the text alone. Let me give you a concrete example of a hypothetical pair of fake and real news items. You can tell me how your classifier would fare distinguishing them. Real news item: Pope calls Trump "not Christian" Fake news item: Pope calls Trump "not Christian" The difference, of course, is that the real news item is published the day after this actually happened and the fake news item can be published at any time, and is easier to write. Let me give you another example. There have been reports of hate crimes following the election. There have been claims that some of these reports are fabricated. So I give you two articles: Article A: Chanting Trump Slogans, Mob Assaults Local Man Article B: Assault Story "Made Up", Local Man Admits Now, tell me again about your algorithm.