The problem is encouraged ignorance and involuntary ignorance. Sort of like the person who does not know how to read who gets blamed for not having access to books except the bible. If a person does not have access to books they will have a difficult time teaching themselves to read and even if they learn to read they will have a difficult time developing a large vocabulary if they only have one book.
Google gives access to the results of science. The problem is there is bad science out there. That is to say a lot of studies which look interesting but which cannot be replicated or haven't been replicated. A lot of studies on mice for example which never have been tried in humans, but this doesn't stop a supplement company from using the mouse model to sell the supplement as somehow possibly being beneficial to humans. The humans essentially are taking part in a trial by buying and using the supplement.
My point is, facts need to be checked, science papers have to be reviewed, logic has to be mapped, and there is no way around this. This is why I like Tauchain because at least you get the logic mapped so that completely contradictory ideas are identified. It still will not be enough because which facts are going to be the official facts? Some will be able to use Tau or any platform with any source of authority they choose and they could for example say only the facts which agree with their religious beliefs are the true facts. Automatic fact checking only would work if you all agree on the source of authority for what is or isn't true. If you believe God is true, and you believe the word of God is in the scripture, then why would you let some less true facts get in the way of ultimate truth? It's a question of how people prioritize facts as well.