I agree wholeheartedly with the majority of what you are saying, however there is one small caveat that I would like to make.  Requiring that the "experts" you invite to publish have the "right university diploma" is not only incredibly elitist but also highly subjective.  What determines the "right university diploma"?  What is your objective measurement of what constitutes the "right university"?  Add to that the stipulation that you must have a university diploma in order to speak on a topic and you run the risk of creating echo chambers where the only people who have the "right" to speak are those that agree.  Anyone can educate themselves on a topic without the need for formalized recognition through a university.  Every person has the right to share their opinion on any topic and to have that opinion questioned and scrutinized.  If you believe that someone's opinion or stance is wrong, ask to see their sources and scrutinize for yourself.  Otherwise all you are doing is stifling open debate.  I appreciate the notion of trying to limit the amount of false information but not at the expense of stifling open honest discourse.