That would require us as a society to develop concrete solutions to determining who can be trusted. That’s obviously impossible, so we’re stuck with the process we have.
It's actually the individual's responsibility to develop an understanding of how one determines what is trustworthy and what isn't trustworthy, and they they do their best to develop that. For example, if someone lies, they are caught lying, the evidence is presented but a person doesn't care or put any weight on that someone lied - well, they are going to rank that person or an organization they are running or still party to.
I'd argue it's bad actors who don't want such a highly organized system that helps people discern easier, a sort of societal wide "fog of war" to make knowing closer towards the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth - harder; with AI generated images and video coming, I don't know how society will cope with such a thing - where "video evidence" could exist painting a horrific reputation of someone to destroy them perhaps not only economically but perhaps also weaponizing a mob to kill someone.
I'd argue it's bad actors who don't want such a highly organized system that helps people discern easier, a sort of societal wide "fog of war" to make knowing closer towards the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth - harder; with AI generated images and video coming, I don't know how society will cope with such a thing - where "video evidence" could exist painting a horrific reputation of someone to destroy them perhaps not only economically but perhaps also weaponizing a mob to kill someone.