Please, read the rest of my comment. The idea isn't to focus on any individual bit of misinformation. Its to throw away the whole thing, conceptually, as a bad

Please, read the rest of my comment. The idea isn't to focus on any individual bit of misinformation. Its to throw away the whole thing, conceptually, as a bad way of getting information, as a low quality source of it. It might have to include some left-leaning media as well, or most media in general as we know it today, because unfortunately most media today is manipulative instead of informative. The hard bit is offering a good alternative, based on a decent set of principles, that will preserve its independence. Some principles might include: - linking and detailed referencing to existing, primary sources - grading the quality of information sources based on levels of evidence determined by experts - showing the work i.e. using modern tech to allow the reader to expand on the whys and details if they want to (wiki style) without necessarily getting bogged down getting the gist of it (if they don't) - you should be able to get from a lightweight, easy-read, to-the-point news article with a video to a full blown code-available paper that is also a Jupyther notebook with the anonymized dataset included, if you click deep enough - full transparency to the entire process with public versioning of drafts and detailed commentary / editorialization etc - for those that want to access it. Open source and open data journalism, science and science communication. (I'll be honest, the above list is super rough WIP at the moment - some of those might turn out to be bad ideas) The reason why people might care now is that they are actually dying or getting maimed because they were exposed to misinformation. Between special interests pushing their narratives and solo manipulative grifters that are banking on building an audience, its hard to tell who to trust. With a system like this, I suspect it might actually be possible to remove taboos eventually. Taboos are only taboos because we fear their effects on mass misinformation, misinterpretation and other systemic (un)intended negative effects. If we can find a new way of thinking that gains wide acceptance and is immune to those flaws, then maybe we can open up taboo topics.