These companies are treating their employees and society with recklessness and disrespect by choosing not to mitigate the massive distribution of false and dangerously destructive information they have enabled for profit. If the garbage that was landing on my electronic doorstep previously was filtered, I cannot imagine how much worse it is about to get.

Paid professionally edited, researched news reporting is a much better use of one's time. Not perfect, but soooo much better than the social media time sink. It is time to walk away.

The important questions are whois deciding what news is fake and what is not? What is their criteria? Where are they getting their information? Who are they trusting to ascertain truth?

Whether we are talking about science, politics, current events or opinion, a need to be able to discuss, debate, opine and think outside the norm is what scientists, journalists and researchers have to do on a daily basis. Stifling free thought is not good for learning, for discerning or for discovery.

The important questions are who is deciding what news is fake and what is not? What is their criteria? Where are they getting their information? Who are they trusting to ascertain truth?

Whether we are talking about science, politics, current events or opinion, a need to be able to discuss, debate, opine and think outside the norm is what scientists, journalists and researchers have to do on a daily basis. Stifling free thought is not good for learning, for discerning or for discovery.

@CYO, it's tragic that the proliferation of the personal computer led to the demise of news on paper that was delivered to our doorstep. Now, most "news" online consists of aggregators who scrape the internet looking for headlines that will lead to clicks. No real editing, no proof-reading, and no fact checking. Now, "social media hype" is "news" that's cranked out all day by people with blue dots next to their name. The pros at META, I suspect, did nothing much more than run an article through a spell-checker with a glance to eliminate profanity before hitting "enter". Gosh, once upon a time a news agency had daily crack-o-dawn meetings where editors decided how to capture the essence of news, and who to send out to photograph it, and who to write the reports. A bygone era, sadly missed.

Part of what you read anywhere is generational in the positions taken and outcomes desired. People now are in a large conversation concerning the ownership of guns. But is we look at the root cause of a lot of the outcomes we are seeing is that people who commit crimes are let out and then proceed to commit the same crimes over and over again. In the progressive position now crimes are dismissed. Sorry that is not the way a lot of people grew up - we did not have people robbing cars in front of other peole with no recourse. Things are falling apart and it is the police that are in trouble now - not the people committing the crimes.

The META reviewwers are of an age in which they are directing their review process within their view of the world. Right or wrong. Look at what happened at twitter - people went wacky over that because their POV would be exposed to other POV's.