[atq2119]

You're making this too easy for yourself. Modern communication technology didn't exist in 1789, and the truth can be difficult to determine for people -- even scientific truth. Outrage cycles are very powerful.

Clearly suppressing a truth is bad. But modern technology causes massive amplification of falsehoods in a way that just didn't exist in the past, and that's bad, too.

[My7thAccount]

The format of communication is irrelevant. At the end of the day, I make my own decisions and so does everyone else. You cannot suppress the bad out of life because its humans that cause the bad by accident or on purpose. Why are people so worried about proving a false hood is it that hard for you? You need to run and hide from a difficult conversation? How do you ever expect to change your mind oh yeah you want the government to make them. You’re motivated by hate against a fictitious enemy of the past because it makes it easier to justify your extremely pitiful fortitude

[Veen]

From a libertarian, individualistic perspective, there is much in what you say. But telling people off for being easily persuadable isn't a viable solution. You have to deal with people as they really are, not as you wish them to be.

From a utilitarian perspective, fake news and persuasive technologies do real harm, and not just to the people who are persuaded. Unless something is done at the group level (i.e. by the state) the harm will continue. You might consider that an appropriate trade-off for liberty, but others can reasonably disagree without being weak.