> Anti-disinformation groups talk endlessly about building “resilience” to disinformation (which in practice means making sure the public hears approved narrati

> Anti-disinformation groups talk endlessly about building “resilience” to disinformation (which in practice means making sure the public hears approved narratives so often that anything else seems frightening or repellent), and audiences are trained to question not only the need for checks and balances, but competition. Competition is increasingly frowned upon not just in the “marketplace of ideas” (an idea itself more and more often described as outdated), but in the traditional capitalist sense. The lack of competition is bad, bbut so is the lack of spectrum. That is, if there is competition it's typically dumb'ed down to binary, with all nuance, subtitles and perhaps contradictions are removed. What's often left can't be won by either side. But perhaps that's exactly the point?