Why the marketplace of ideas needs more markets

Episteme (2025)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

It is frequently argued that false and misleading claims, spread primarily on social media, are a serious problem in need of urgent response. Current strategies to address the problem – relying on fact-checks, source labeling, limits on the visibility of certain claims, and, ultimately, content removals – face two serious shortcomings: they are ineffective and biased. Consequently, it is reasonable to want to seek alternatives. This paper provides one: to address the problems with misinformation, social media platforms should abandon third-party fact-checks and rely instead on user-driven prediction markets. This solution is likely less biased and more effective than currently implemented alternatives and, therefore, constitutes a superior way of tackling misinformation.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2025-01-23

Downloads
136 (#171,955)

6 months
136 (#43,014)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Bartek Chomanski
Adam Mickiewicz University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Fake News and Epistemic Vice: Combating a Uniquely Noxious Market.Megan Fritts & Frank Cabrera - 2022 - Journal of the American Philosophical Association (3):1-22.
Is the Attention Economy Noxious?Clinton Castro & Adam Pham - 2020 - Philosophers' Imprint 20 (17):1-13.
Bad Language Makes Good Politics.Adam F. Gibbons - forthcoming - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy.

View all 13 references / Add more references