Fake News means there has been a rise of very low-quality media reporting and false or inciting propaganda is spreading.

Of course, first things first. The double side of the coin in this matter seems to be a real nightmare. And I don't mean such cases as of James Damore, but something much more serious.

Jimmy Wales, co-founder of the Wikipedia, and his voice of common sense

Speaking in an interview with Sky News, he said: "There is no simple solution. You know, you can't just pass a law to fix it. But I think it's something that we as a society have to grapple with.

[...] The Wikipedia doesn't take political sides and concern about some sources, like a tabloid is not really about their politics. We link very much to left-wing, right-wing quality newspapers. But it is a real problem that there are things that are printed which aren't true or high-doubted. [...] You have to look at everything in context. So if 'The Daily Mail' does have really great journalism and brings a great story that it's worth, to sight in."

But there are also other people

The definition of fake news is for them apparently any news they don't like. They perhaps believe they are focusing psychic energy, gathered by the dish of their invisible circle. Their traditions are very strong and rituals are still important.

Their breath of the sacred knowledge should render us free from harm. Also, it should complete the invisible chain and make us one with nature and the elements.

Purging the community of sin is the task of a priest

So he (or she) who are accepting this burden on their shoulders, has every right to forbid danger of fire, the fire of speech.

The final aim of their work is to free us from the sin of selfish thinking and from the guilt of having our own views too, or we cannot be happy - even if other people would say: they are shining glass or rather like robots, puppets.

You aren’t going to say: what an extraordinary brainchild?

Perhaps you're right. Social media companies face fines of up to €50m (£43m) if they persistently fail to remove content considered by the (at least theoretically) non-governmental organisations as being illegal or representing fake news from their sites under a new law in force now in Germany.

This policy has a dramatic effect on the IT sector. To achieve many unrealistic targets the government had been forced to put forward harsher and increasingly worrying policies. And to avoid the consequences of these policies only one thing can be done. Get social media fake.

There is, of course, another point of view. Namely; to consider it as an important attempt to introduce some kind of regulatory system for social media. To believe that the citizens need controls or supervision of news gathering. I'm not exactly setting the world on fire by the opinion that history and present-day legislation is nothing but the actions of men (and women) in pursuit of their ends, and certainly not the building of a perfect society.