Open menu

Add disinformation warnings as a default on all news sites – unless they share all their sources of information

If a news site does not explicitly state all their sources of information in their articles etc. they should automatically be labelled as "not reliable".

Whenever someone enters a news site, there should be a warning to be careful what you believe when reading on the website. This should apply to all news sites that do not explicitly state all their sources of information. If a news site does not provide all of their sources, it will automatically be considered as "not reliable".  That way, the news sites will have the incitement to share all of their sources of information, thus combatting disinformation.

Freedom of speech is very important, but the news sites, pages, conglomerates (with more than thousands and millions of followers) have to be more responsible to follow the rules and not spread misinformation.

Read more

What people think

20 comments on Add disinformation warnings as a default on all news sites – unless they share all their sources of information
desirée  • 27 March 2023

I do not think this would really be a change because most people won’t check out the sites and they can give sources but one wouldn’t know if those are valid sources

Sabahudin Kukuruzović  • 27 March 2023

I am an EU citizen and I think that EU should allow other sources of information such as Russia Today be available for every citizen to easily access.If EU really stands for freedom of information they should allow media such as this one to be available,not cancel it.

Response to Sabahudin Kukuruzović by NOEL  • 29 March 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

This is 100 %.

Response to Sabahudin Kukuruzović by Ignaś  • 04 April 2023

Nooo, we should ban every foreign media because we can't trust citizens to think for themselves!
This is a direct threat to our Democracy. Ban all russian sources NOW!

Oskar
 • 27 March 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

How should this be verified? Man would have to make huge effort (sources as metadata) or not all the information could be verified, which makes the whole system meaningless.

NOEL
 • 29 March 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

If we really want to protect democracy then we have to protect freedom of speech, not forcing social broadcasting platforms to censor or hide certain papers rather than shadow banning.

Igor
 • 30 March 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

In my view, this is too intrusive in the infosfer. I believe that good education for citizens in checking the quality of information
at levels lower than university education, it will be more useful and will avoid entering a monopoly on the determination of ‘reliability’.

Response to Igor by E  • 31 March 2023

So everything lower than university education is less educated about different information sources? If you’re going to give extra education or courses, don’t discriminate on education level! University students can also be ignorant about using sources. 

Bouna Diallo  • 30 March 2023

Manca strutture di vigilanza grazie

Sara  • 30 March 2023

What if the sources are, in their turn, not reliable ? If the criteria for a news site to be considered reliable is just to state all its sources, it could happen that the sources themselves are not. Moreover, even if a solution to that was identified, I think that many other elements, besides statement of sources, need to be taken into account, for reliability to be more exactly evaluated. What if, instead of using this radical label (i.e. not reliable), there was an index that measures news sites' reliability according to a list of critireas ? In this case, a certain "percentage" of reliability could be attributed to each news site, resulting from its "scores" for each criteria. Furthermore, people should be allowed to see the details of this classification, i.e. seeing which criterias the news site is or is not satisfying and to what extend.

Andrea
 • 30 March 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

It is difficult to distinguish between information and disinformation today. One solution could be labelling, but you need to see who should do it? and the tools you have at your disposal to label it.

Rens
 • 30 March 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

Disagree. A website that does not mention its sources does not automatically have to bring unreliable news. In addition: what to do with anonymous sources? And with you?

Zoé  • 31 March 2023

Je suis totalement d'accord. Il me semble important afin d'éviter les fakes news de responsabiliser les émetteurs de message sur les réseaux en citant leurs sources.

Elias Hanjes
 • 02 April 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

I could imagine that, although they are source data everywhere, they are no longer reliable of high quality and are no longer a quality label.

Wojtek  • 06 April 2023

To classify and find out what manipulative methods and how they want to manipulate – this way some people's fears and fears could be alleviated.

Wojtek  • 06 April 2023

Create a portal that defines manipulative articles in basic psychological terms so as to calm down and soften some overly sensational headlines that do damage with their abstract and unreal form of communication and manipulate emotionality.

Marta Ivorra  • 06 April 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

It seems to me to be a good idea. I believe that the more we look at the news, the more uninformed we get.

Jakub Balik  • 07 April 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

I believe that it is necessary not only to mention the source of the information, but also where that source of information e.g. many times in the news, I have seen as youtube.com, which is of course a harsh message and, in my view, the link, the title of the film, the name of the author and the moment when the clip starts in the film should be given. Alternatively, when someone gives a book, article or scientific work, they want to have access by hyperlinks to the extract on which someone is fishing.

Constantin
 • 14 April 2023
This is an automated translation. ()

It is democratic that there is nothing but racism in the European Union.

Julia  • 12 June 2023

The only way to tackle disinformation is to boost critical thinking in the population. Provide quality education and journalism, encourage people to compare and contrast information, to be critical, and to access various sources of information.

Any thoughts on this idea?

615 votes with an average rating of 1.7.