Alt facts, fake news, invisible intelligence, imaginary friends, politics has it all.
What I get annoyed with is all the actual phoney stuff like the MLK bust being removed, Trump plagiarising the Avatar and Bees movies. The more fake stuff out there, the less people will believe real accusations, evidenced or not.
I get similarly annoyed when shit the government does here is met with an extreme view. The recent (current) travel rorts saga. Now the rules may allow way too much, but a lot of it is within the rules. A lot of people don't know where the line should be drawn either. Family holidays, as far as I'm aware do have an allowance, so it's a bit hyper-critical to jump on every pollie who takes their kids to Cairns, if it was within guidelines. The problem then is the abuse of those allowances. A lot of jobs have perks. When one of our suppliers is in town, they take me out, and we get on the sauce. In the interest of networking, my employer gets my bill for accommodation. Should a federal minister be charging the taxpayer for flying to Melbourne to go to the footy? Not sure he should, when he is paid so well, but I don't have an issue with them calling it work related and in the scheme of things, a commercial flight shouldn't be what is being chased.
Private jets being used, and a health Minister claiming 22 trips to the Gold Coast is criminal. Bishop getting an empty plane to fly all the way across the country to pick her up is criminal, but if we blast every politician for every dollar they spend on what could be perceived as a "perk", none of them will call the others out.
Long winded way to make my point, which is that whenever there is cause to criticise or question, the barrage of extremism from the opposite end risks harming their cause and the arguments start to look silly. Some balance is needed.