>"Fake news detectors" just sounds like a way to abrogate the responsibility of the individual to understand and analyze sources. If people are going online, a

>"Fake news detectors" just sounds like a way to abrogate the responsibility of the individual to understand and analyze sources. If people are going online, and reading this stuff and getting all angry and spazzy such that they go buy a gun and shoot up a shopping mall. . . then "source analysis" is actually becoming a serious public safety issue. (actually more dangerous when the delusional and deranged vote). Sure: there are three factors at play in these incidents: Availability of guns, (which we apparently can't address, because 'muh second amendment'), Mental Health (which we apparently can't address because 'muh premium's too high'), and Inflammatory Fake News (which we also can't address because 'muh first amendment!'). However, I don't think it's infringing on free speech if a social media site slaps a "source credibility rating" banner on shared agitprop.