In this presentation, I will argue that social epistemologists can inform the design of online social networks by strengthening the theoretical framework underlying the study of online misinformation spread. Indeed, in recent years, social psychologists studying online misinformation spread have proposed explicit countermeasures to it, but the theory underlying these proposals is often left largely implicit. As a case study, I will examine Psychologist Tali Sharot's proposal that instead of merely punishing users who share misinformation with "sticks," online social networks should incentivize them to share accurate information with "carrots," and critically evaluate her empirical study of adding "trust" and "distrust" reactions as "carrots" and "sticks." I will argue for its philosophical relevance, especially for "speech act" theories of online sharing. However, I will also show that it jumps to a conclusion that exceeds what its underlying theory would warrant if made fully explicit (I will give informal but rigorous proof for that claim). Then, I will propose an alternative to the "carrots-and-sticks" incentive structure within a stronger theoretical framework, which I will call the "carrot cake model" of incentives, in hommage to the original "carrots and sticks" model, and show how it can achieve Sharot's initial goal (and give an informal, but rigorous, proof for that claim, too). Then, I will conclude on social epistemology's role in studying and preventing online misinformation and, more generally, harmful online content.