I've never heard of this documentary, but if it makes false claims, then, yes, it should be labelled fiction, and possibly downranked. This seems so morally ob

I've never heard of this documentary, but if it makes false claims, then, yes, it should be labelled fiction, and possibly downranked. This seems so morally obvious to me, and the converse so plainly wicked, that I'm going to assume I've hit one of those issues where there is some deep-seated worldview-differences that say as much about me as they do about my interlocutor. If I'd hazard a guess, it would be that I believe that there is some sort of fact of the matter, and that people -- even large groups of people -- can be actually very wrong, in fact, and this wrongness counts again listening to them in the future, or valuing their opinions the same as those which are not wrong. This is a belief I hold and I know it is unpopular ;) The alternative, often expressed on the right as a 'marketplace of ideas' and on the left as 'values-alignment', is that there are multiple competing ways of assessing the worth of an idea, and an idea's wrongness might (say) be counterbalanced by its congeniality, its convenience, or its usefulness, and therefore that it's mean or base of me or anyone else to complain about someone pumping falsehood into the ears and eyes of the planet. But at the risk of being melodramatic, I say: this is a hill I'm ready to die on. Or not; but definitely not both at once.