The Economist's article is strife with irony. Those who take the article or poll with seriousness, are actually equally (or perhaps more) gullible and naïve tha

The Economist's article is strife with irony. Those who take the article or poll with seriousness, are actually equally (or perhaps more) gullible and naïve than the purported "holocaust deniers". The article (purposely) leaves out any information which could potentially confirm their claims. "Americans 18-24 get their news from social media rather than professional news organizations" translated: in the face of the propagandist's lackadaisically built narratives, people are gaining media literacy, and their skepticism is becoming necessary to navigate the waters of mainstream disinformation. Public relations fails again. Looks like further education doesn't just lower birth rate, but also, raises intelligence? Apparently they didn't see that coming... Also it should be noted "getting news from social media" often means reading news site articles that people posted links to on social networks. With the added benefit of commentary by real people, and thereby not falling for the crafted illusion of consensus. Shocker. Hurry, censor harder! Bot harder! We're loosing em guys, flood that zone! As for the poll, who the F knows, NO details on methodology, sampling characteristics, etc. Perhaps another Simpson's Paradox weaponized to shape public belief.