PLEASE HELP!! its due soon and i dont understand

ansswer question 3 on last attachment.

6 Putting aside such brash pessimism, what can be done? The platforms on which fake content appears (Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Twitter) have taken some steps to combat disinformation. In a recent blog post, Facebook pledged to "remove misleading manipulated media" if it is the product of artificial intelligence or machine learning that merges, replaces, or superimposes content onto a video, making it appear to be authentic." This is important, but detection is a serious challenge, and few trust Big Tech to fully self-regulate. Sure, there's a profusion of laws around identity theft and defamation that might dissuade creators of harmful fakes, but it's unclear who will enforce them or how. 7 As law professors Danielle Citron and Robert Chesney describe in their paper "Deepfakes: A Looming Challenge for Privacy, Democracy, and National Security," three federal agencies (the FCC, the FEC, and the FTC) could in theory regulate the dissemination of fake content, but "on close inspection, their potential roles appear quite limited." The FCC's jurisdiction is limited to radio and television. The FEC is concerned only with the electoral process. The FTC oversees "fake advertising," but deepfakes aren't typically hawking products or services. 8 So, what about a new federal agency? A central body tasked with combating disinformation, parsing fact from fiction and thereby ensuring Americans' collective sanity when the flood of fakes truly arrives a Bureau of Information, a Department of Facts, a Ministry of Truth! migung 3. Wilbur explains current solutions to the problem in paragraphs 6 and 7 but also pokes holes in these ideas. How does highlighting the weaknesses of existing solutions strengthen his overall argument