Most prestigious publications have weighed in on this topic, with all it's titles and euphemisms: fake news, alternative facts, conspiracy thinking, echo chambe

Most prestigious publications have weighed in on this topic, with all it's titles and euphemisms: fake news, alternative facts, conspiracy thinking, echo chambers..... mostly with nothing to say. Scientific American recently ran a feature that may as well have been titled: "You won't believe SHOCKING the TRUTH about FAKE news!!"(1) For the first half of the article, they cited credentialed research institutes, people, sub-disciplines like computational sociology and talked about recent "advances" made "studying social phenomena in a quantitative manner." As far as I can tell, the only content was "confirmation bias exists," with a non-explicit implication that our understanding of this newly discovered phenomenon is advancing fast. There was also an anecdote about texas. Everyone seems to want to weigh in on this conversation, but no one seems to have anything substantial to say about it. So sure, "conspiracy theorists" will be able to challenge video evidence. I don't know if that changes anything. (1) actually titled "inside the echo chamber"