Table 7.

Approaches and limitations of different perspectives to handle misinformation

Approach	Plus (+)	Minus (−)
Journalism	Fact-checking; increasing the literacy of journalists to avoid giving voice to false narratives.	Corrections fail to reach a significant segment of the audience; denial effects caused by cognitive biases may reinforce belief in false stories; manual corrections are limited in scale.
Education	Promoting information and media literacy in each individual.	Focus on the long term; fails to consider structural problems in education; may be disregarded by authoritarian governments; is expensive; requires retraining.
Government solutions	Definition of a clear boundary between information and disinformation; punitive or regulatory measures can contain the production and dissemination of disinformation.	Content in the boundary is hard to regulate; may be used to restrict freedom of expression; may be perceived as censorship; lacks extraterritorial application; can inhibit dissent voices; individuals will find ways to bypass regulations.
Digital platforms	Enforcing moderation of content and transparency of advertising; promotion of quality news; partnerships with fact-checking agencies.	Vulnerable to commercial interests of customers and partners; dependent on proprietary software; opaque moderation process may be perceived as biased.
Computer Science	Usage of computational resources to support the automatic fact-checking and misinformation detection; development of misinformation indicators for promoting media literacy.	Generally, fails to address the consumers’ needs; may lack transparency; data annotation for training models is not scalable; models are quickly outdated.