Opinion: Filtering out fake news — there ought to be an app for that

To the editor: Anyone can say anything, true or false. Falsehoods can even be published on social media that are intentionally untrue but intended to earn dollars via advertising clicks. The 1st Amendment allows this, regardless of the hateful and harmful consequences. The best way to neutralize fake news is with the truth. (“Man told police he was armed to save child sex slaves, left D.C. pizzeria when he didn’t find any,” Dec. 5)

Supercomputers have mastered not only the game of chess, but also the TV game show “Jeopardy!” IBM’s “Watson” succeeded with lightning-fast searches of countless databases to come up with more than enough right answers. Similarly, technology companies today could develop a “truth and knowledge” app that users could activate to display subtitles evaluating the degree of truthfulness of statements made during a speech or debate or while reading a news article. It could also offer a link to resources that would itemize the “facts.”

Anyone can say what he or she wants, but the audience should have the option to know the truth. A “truth and knowledge” app could give users the truth, and with the knowledge gained they could best decide what opinions to form or actions to take based on facts. No one should be beat up, voted against or shot for falsehoods. Truth should prevail.

Sage Rainbow, Oxnard

..

To the editor: Greta Van Susteren’s opinion of what constitutes “fake news” is biased. (“Who’s to blame for fake news?” Opinion, Dec. 5)

She states she hears calls to censor what we can watch or read, which is the first I’ve heard of it until now. She then proceeds to go all over the map with stories of beheadings and conspiracy theories, ending with the “fact” of the Obama administration spreading the fake news that a YouTube video sparked the attack on the U.S. embassy in Libya.

She blames only the New York Times for reporting that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, leaving out the many Bush administration statements to that effect.

Finally, she closes by blaming “all of us” for squandering our freedom of expression. Which is weird, because that wasn’t the topic of the article to begin with, in which case I call this whole article “fake truth.”

Bob Loza, Burbank

..

So President-elect Donald Trump’s presumptive national security advisor, Michael Flynn, is apparently fine telling lies as long as they achieve his goal, no matter how many lives or reputations he puts in danger and that people are guilty until proven innocent.

Deliberate lying may be the way of life in dictatorships, but it has no place in the elections or governance of the greatest democracy in the world. Or is the incoming administration trying to change that too?

Bonnie Compton Hanson, Santa Ana

..

To the editor: The harm done by fake news in isolated episodes like that occurring in the Washington pizza parlor is bad enough. But it doesn’t begin to compare with the devastation that can be wreaked by fake news’ interference with democratic processes. There’s little question but that studiously propagated misinformation from foreign sources helped Trump.

Now, as he proceeds apace to install a veritable plutocracy, many feel that the shadowy forces that favored Trump by churning out fake news stories possibly did more harm to the U.S. than an invasion would have. The next four years don’t augur well for America’s vaunted freedoms and prosperity.

It’s often said that the truth will set us free. So too will fake news imprison and impoverish us.

Greg Gilbert, Cool, Calif.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook