Even if selection of information released is determined 100% by bias, I still think it's dangerous and bad for society to label accurate information releases as

Even if selection of information released is determined 100% by bias, I still think it's dangerous and bad for society to label accurate information releases as "disinfo" I think the >containing intentionally false and misleading material portion of the definition is crucial. By all means, call it foreign election interference or a foreign propaganda campaign. But in my opinion, accurate information can never be 'disinfo'. I think this is a slippery slope towards discrediting all information that embarrasses or threatens the state: whistleblowers, investigative reporting on war crimes and corruption, etc.