system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Newspapers should have to maintain certain factual standards to be classed as news outlets.

In the UK, we do have an Independent Press Standards Organisation, but it is ineffective and several news organisations have opted out.

I strongly believe that the lack of accuracy, sensationalism and propaganda spread by newspapers (especially those like the Daily Mail and the Sun) is a massively damaging force in society. The Daily Mail is the most read paper in the UK, but frequently misrepresents facts and uses this to fuel hatred (and recently - borderline fascism). And people believe what they read - the majority of people don't have the time or desire to cross-reference articles from different sources to piece together what might be the truth. It's not defensible to allow opinion to masquerade as news simply when 23 million people are ingesting it. I should add here that I'm not simply disagreeing because they hold a different political opinion to me - but for instance, I have a law degree, and the Mail often gets basic law wrong. The Guardian has definitely fallen guilty of this too (in the recent Ched Evans case).

The best way I see to combat this is a more vigilant watchdog organisation, and the clearest way to send a damning message about the quality of papers would be to only allow newspapers which maintain a set standard of factual accuracy to classify and market themselves as 'newspapers', with the remaining ones lowered to something along the lines of 'magazines', 'entertainment papers', or other options - I am definitely open to other labels. 

I don't particularly want to argue about how they can judge factual accuracy - press watchdogs all over manage to do this, and obviously there would be enough leeway granted not to frighten journalists into failing to publish reports out of fear of being sued. I don't think this would stifle freedom of expression. 

Ultimately, this would send a clear message to the public about the quality and accuracy of the information they rely on. It would allow readers to make an informed choice about where they get their news, and would hopefully result in newspapers drastically upping their standards of journalism.
gpt
People would just do what they do now: Attacking the gatekeeper watchdog organizations as biased and so ignoring them.

One thing that may not translate from the UK is that here in the US, we have an enormous, all-encompassing underdog narrative.  If you can frame it such that your viewpoint is being held down somehow, you feel more sure about your opinion.  Watchdog groups would just make that easier to do.