People routinely rely on inaccuracies they have read to complete subsequent tasks, even when they should already possess accurate prior knowledge. This problematic reliance maintains even when people are warned about potential inaccuracies prior to reading. In contrast, reductions have been observed when interventions target encoding of inaccuracies during reading. We investigated whether interruptions during encoding would similarly prove beneficial for disrupting attention to and memory for inaccuracies. Participants read a story containing both accurate and inaccurate assertions. Their readings were interrupted at 300-word intervals (Experiment 1) or immediately after each assertion (Experiments 2 and 3). After reading, participants judged the validity of statements summarizing the assertions. Interruptions were ineffective: Participants overall made more incorrect judgments after reading inaccurate than accurate assertions, at rates comparable with participants who read without interruption. These results help identify the mechanisms that underlie reliance on inaccuracies, and suggest useful targets for more effective interventions.