>You would think so. But my dad is a varsity Professor with a PhD, my mom has a Masters in English. They believe literally every cock and bull story they see on Facebook.
This is precisely what the parent to your comment is saying. Many (most?) degrees hold more symbolic value (read, fake) than real practical value because that is what education has devolved into: favoring symbolism (test scores, degrees) over real life applicability.
>If there was a trusted (read, authoritative) service that one could use to vet such stories then the problem would go away.
This is a logical fallacy.
If you already think you lack the ability to find truth, how would you know it was real when someone else supposedly gave it to you? If you can't trust yourself how can you trust your trust in others?
But this is exactly the issue. If you're saying "these people aren't competent to evaluate news, so they need a trusted source", then how can they possibly evaluate their trusted source?
It's not a surprise that people who can't pick out fake news stories also can't tell how effective Snopes is, it's the heart of the problem. (Well, that and "if Snopes became authoritative, how would you know if it started lying?")
I would guess that the difference between you and your parents is years of exposure to the tropes, tone, register and other pragmatics of internet content.
You would think so. But my dad is a varsity Professor with a PhD, my mom has a Masters in English.
They believe literally every cock and bull story they see on Facebook.
You make an interesting point when you state that "The primary goal these days seems to be obedience and unquestioning believe in authority." because for me that is both the problem and, ironically, the very obvious solution.
If there was a trusted (read, authoritative) service that one could use to vet such stories then the problem would go away.
The devil is in the details though. I've seen people dismiss Snopes as some sort of leftist agenda pandering website.