Unfortunately, this is wishful thinking. Daniel Gilbert authored an interesting paper on how the human mind uses a Spinozan system, which basically means that comprehension and acceptance of information are tied at the knot, then people decide whether it's credible or whether to unaccept it; a consequence of this is that the deck is ultimately stacked in favor of accepting information in most cases.

Although suspension of belief is possible (Hasson, Simmons, & Todorov, 2005; Schul, Mayo, & Burnstein, 2008), it seems to require a high degree of attention, considerable implausibility of the message, or high levels of distrust at the time the message is received. So, in most situations, the deck is stacked in favor of accepting information rather than rejecting it, provided there are no salient markers that call the speaker’s intention of cooperative conversation into question. Going beyond this default of acceptance requires additional motivation and cognitive resources: If the topic is not very important to you, or you have other things on your mind, misinformation will likely slip in.