Imagine if a major social platform removed accounts from a particular region – would it solve the fake news epidemic? Some argue that a significant chunk of coordinated disinformation campaigns originate from specific geographic sources, suggesting that stricter regional moderation could theoretically eliminate up to 99% of platform manipulation. The hypothesis raises interesting questions about content governance, bot networks, and whether geographic-based enforcement is a viable (or ethical) solution to fighting misinformation at scale.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
9 Likes
Reward
9
3
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ReverseTradingGuru
· 11h ago
99% — that number sounds outrageous; who calculated it?
View OriginalReply0
ProbablyNothing
· 11h ago
99% eradication of false information? Buddy, that's a naive idea. Disconnecting from the internet can't stop humanity's talent for storytelling.
View OriginalReply0
StablecoinEnjoyer
· 12h ago
That 99% figure sounds outrageous. How does banning accounts by region help? Those teams that are really making money have already established cross-border operations.
Imagine if a major social platform removed accounts from a particular region – would it solve the fake news epidemic? Some argue that a significant chunk of coordinated disinformation campaigns originate from specific geographic sources, suggesting that stricter regional moderation could theoretically eliminate up to 99% of platform manipulation. The hypothesis raises interesting questions about content governance, bot networks, and whether geographic-based enforcement is a viable (or ethical) solution to fighting misinformation at scale.