Main Argument - The core argument is that society is becoming increasingly desensitized to disinformation, leading to a dangerous indifference that erodes ethical standards and harms society [2][5][6][10] - The speaker advocates for proactive measures, specifically "weird checking," to combat disinformation by challenging the social norm of accepting lies [28][30] Problem Definition - Disinformation, defined as intentionally deceptive false information, is distinct from misinformation, which is unintentional [11][13] - The speaker highlights the phenomenon of "deception fatigue," where repeated exposure to dishonesty diminishes emotional and moral responses [20] - Disinformation has significant real-world consequences, including contributing to preventable deaths (e g, 330,000+ deaths during the HIV/AIDS epidemic in South Africa), fueling distrust in election results, and costing the global economy an estimated $78 billion USD annually [8][9] Proposed Solution - "Weird checking" is introduced as a method to counteract disinformation by questioning the normality of spreading fake news, thereby influencing social norms [28][29] - Individuals are encouraged to actively resist disinformation by calling out those who spread it, reinforcing the idea that such behavior is socially unacceptable [30][31] Social Norms and Behavior - Social norms significantly influence human behavior, and the normalization of dishonesty creates a dangerous feedback loop [23][26] - The speaker draws a parallel to the shift in social norms around smoking, suggesting that similar changes are possible with disinformation [24][25] Call to Action - The speaker urges individuals to resist passivity and actively condemn dishonesty to preserve their own moral compass and protect society from the harmful effects of disinformation [32][33][35]