Facebook, Twitter can’t “block” fake news, but could rank “trustworthiness”
"A currency based on reputation" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whuffie)
Was applied, briefly, to "social media reputation," but never caught on:
Other measures of "social influence" persist:
Actively curating content by "removing fake news" borders on censorship.
However, I reject the claim that it’s "complex."
We see "social" ranking applied to forms of media already:
Note distinction on RottenTomatoes.com between "critics." "top critics," and "audience."
We can see highly detailed analysis for content on IMDB.com:
Another approach – "Metascore," "Critic Score," and "User Score."
If we can rank / score communication when presented in film, why can’t we similarly rank communication when presented via "microblog" on Twitter, and especially Facebook?
Obviously some work would need to go into predicting how people / organizations might "game" the system to manipulate their score.
This is why a paid staff of "curators" / "content evaluators similar to the operation that "Snopes.com" carries out might prove necessary.
As stated by another blogger, if Facebook put half the resources into "curating posts" as it did into censoring nipples, we’d not be bombarded with "fake news," and unreliable, unvetted content that is actively generated by those who wish to spread misinformation / influence public opinion with the currency of information.