There’s two reasons why I’ve brainstormed this idea.
1) I believe, for analyses of statements made by government and NGO representatives, it’s more important to have intention-checkers than fact-checkers. I can forgive the dissemination of false information if the intentions were virtuous, but if someone’s intentions are malicious or misrepresented, than I don’t even care what truths they have to offer.
2) It’s my opinion that if a conceptually conceived of intention behind making a statement is not externalized, then that intention can shift, and even the thinker won’t have evidence of the change in intention. I mean this in the sense that it’s not only easy to get away with a misrepresented intention, not only easy for someone to self-delude themselves about their intentions, but that thought itself does not offer any evidence of its existence, so while intention may remain perfect within a conscious mind, it is inevitably imperfect and uncertain in the external universe. This is all based on my remembered-thinking-theory (pressureoflight.ca)
Solution: design a means of assessing intention behind statements made, not based on what intentions are expressed by a speaker, not based on what intentions are deduced by listeners, but based on an AI that analyzes a statement in the context of all relavent information available online. It would be a seriously complicated subject: analysis could include both contextualizing the statement in terms of the speaker’s online life, but also in terms of aggregate studies of those types of statements and what intentions (self-promotion, deception, genuine knowledge-dissemination) are correlated with those types of statement. But I think it would not only be useful to an objective analysis of statements made online, but also a person may also want to plug their own statements into the AI to get a more objective understanding of why they’re saying, online, what they’re saying.