<p>Fake news was widely prevalent on social media platforms during the COVID-19 pandemic. Previous studies have extensively investigated why people believe and share fake news and effective techniques that can help curb its spread in different contexts. However, which approach is more effective in a situation like the COVID-19 pandemic remains unknown, which will be likely to happen more often in the future. This study attempts to compare four representative measures based on the reputation theory and the cognitive dissonance theory—low source ratings by experts, low source ratings by users, displaying related contradictory news, and critical comments—to determine better technique in reducing the sharing intention and believability of fake news. This study collected data with experiments and analyzed them through ANOVA. The results show that related contradictory news can effectively diminish the believability of fake news, whereas critical comments can reduce the sharing intention of fake news. We contribute to this field of research by classifying various curbing techniques into four categories according to the source and the content based on solid theories and discovering the different impacts of the four techniques on the sharing intention and believability of fake news.</p>