I see.
I understand now that you did not intend your post in any way to be discussing people writ large who have lost trust in public information dissemination, and were only talking about a very specific generalization of very specific people - who today remain extremely vague and could not be enumerated.
I understand that you do not mean to say anything about people whose trust in public information dissemination has been broken. Instead, you were aggravated against a certain group of people on a certain specific issue and your universal quantifiers were meant to be existential quantifiers. Your discussion was intended to restrict all possible solutions and state powers to one specific issue and one specific community - presumably for a very short time.
I hope you come to a similar understanding of my post. In this case it was intended not as a narrow discussion but a broad one about what powers and capabilities are and are not legitimate for state police to have in the functioning of civil society, and remiss over the current widespread use of propaganda and censorship and the arguments from those concerned about specific issues to justify widespread powers to implement much stronger and wider reaching propaganda and censorship.
We appear to be in full agreement about this: censorship and propaganda as it is widely practiced in America is horrible and the people who have had their trust broken because of this are in the right. Unfortunately, the vacuum of credible information has led some to believe rumors. And that's a shame.
I disagree with you that we should call the victims of credible-information-vacuum mean names and think of them as provably nasty conspiracy mongers. I think that's blaming the victim.
I propose we solve the credibility crisis with US media by reducing the powers of state police to censor and manipulate it. In doing so, and in encouraging real dissenting investigative journalism, there will be institutions that provide real, honest, hard-worked and informative context on complex issues - capable of predicting and explaining ongoing times.
In this setting, the maximal number of people will be attracted by the quality of information from US media outlets, now unshackled from propaganda laws, national security constraints, war embedding procedures, and quid pro quo access.
The predictive quality of this information will draw down from the mass of confused people attracted to communities you dislike, because they will find that the successful media distribution companies are not biased, politicized, or spun for state policing purposes.
This sounds like a win-win and I'm glad we could come to that mutual understanding.