There should be a clear distinction between news that are factually false and those that share viewpoints that are counter to the mainstream. Labeling the latter "disinformation" is a mere act of political speech.
There should be. We've tried it with "fact checkers". Most devolved into political operators rather quickly. Apparently it's not so easy to do, and probably not because we lack technology.
Comments
There should be a clear distinction between news that are factually false and those that share viewpoints that are counter to the mainstream. Labeling the latter "disinformation" is a mere act of political speech.
I respectfully disagree.
I just want two things.
1/ Show your work. Data, code, citations, attributed quotes, whatever.
2/ Sign your work.
Then everyone so inclined can determine truthiness at their leisure. Just like with academic publishing.
Omitting 1 means it's just opinion, 2 means gossip, both means propaganda.
There should be. We've tried it with "fact checkers". Most devolved into political operators rather quickly. Apparently it's not so easy to do, and probably not because we lack technology.