http://www.macworld.com/article/316... Macworld 2017-02-20&utm_term=mw_bestof_html Tim Cook apparently believes tech companies have an obligation to filter fake news in order to preserve the utility of the internet as a news medium. By technologically squeezing fake news, he thinks consumers will be protected. In a manner reminiscent of how governments promise all good things, he proposes to do this in a way that will not impinge on either free speech or free access to information, also (and of course) without elaborating how. This seems misguided to me, if well intentioned, as the very notion is oxymoronic. Moreover, notwithstanding the utopian promise of a technologic fix for "fake news", this would be a form of censorship which even if theoretically possible (I don't think so) would advantage the very worst offenders by blocking vital meta-information from consumers. A far better and less invasive approach would be to develop voluntary ethical standards which would emphasize that some basis in truth must exist. One would then campaign to educate content creators in what such a basis might be and consumers in how to recognize when content is created under an ethical standard. This could be accomplished with impartiality and to a high degree of efficacy using the free and open source software community model of voluntarism. It seems to me that many smart people are probably also ethical and that a good number of them might appreciate the wisdom contained in the statement, attributed to historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall, "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."