[MontyCarloHall]

Pre-internet, it was harder to debunk myths but also harder to spread them. Nowadays, it’s easier to debunk myths but also much easier to spread them. These do not necessarily cancel out; as they say, “the amount of energy needed to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude larger than to produce it.”

As an extreme example, pre-internet, a conspiracy theory-inclined person might randomly run across a handful of full-blown conspiracy theorists in his day-to-day life. This makes it easier for him to question his leanings, since he only observes a small minority of people going all-in on the conspiracy theory. Nowadays, a conspiracy-inclined person can easily find online communities comprising all other full-blown conspiracy theorists everywhere the world. This quickly reinforces his belief in the conspiracy, since he sees an apparent majority of people in this online community believing the myth.

[pohl]

Moreover, now it's now easy for adherents to some myths to find each other on the internet. IMO this is not a good tradeoff.

[wildmanx]

Also feels like they are more common on mainstream-ish TV.

[havblue]

I honestly think it's easy to get secondary sources now, but it's still hard to get primary sources. If people have different views of preventing covid they're arguing over different news articles. They aren't arguing about specific studies that they have easy access to.

[bolasanibk]

Hard agree. It's very easy to find people who agree with whatever your particular brand of crazy is. And it does not help that online people can say things they would never say face to face.