Perhaps you are genuinely not old enough to remember a time before YouTube and Twitter, but there were way fewer conspiracy theories floating around, and they didn't have nearly the social impact that they do today. A coordinated misinformation campaign could never have swayed elections in the US and UK before social media. Why? Because there were institutions in place that acted as a filter. Say what you will about that arrangement, it was more effective and suppressing Crazy than whatever it is we've got now.

Yes the media has many ways of getting wacky stories out there.

One of the old favorites https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunday_Sport Still didn't stop some people believing it completely though, human nature.

> there were way fewer conspiracy theories floating around, and they didn't have nearly the social impact that they do today

I remember a whole bunch of crazies on usenet in the early-mid 90s but that was an extremely effective filter at keeping them from the rest of the world.

David Icke rose to fame long before the Internet.

Mormons.

Scientologists.

The benefits of smoking tobacco. The danger of smoking marijuana. (And vice versa, depending on decade.)

The aberrancy/normalcy of homosexuality (take your pick... depends on the decade.)

The vast conspiracy theory that is the Red Mensce. The vast conspiracy that is evil capitalism. (Once again, depends on the decade and locale as to which disinformation campaign is at work.)

Etc.

All of these -- and dozens of others -- thrived pre-internet.

Youtube -- like newspapers before it -- is dying. The ability to host, index, and disseminate video content is spreading st breakneck speed. Youtube is at the point that magazines were several years ago: becoming more and more sanctimonious until it will awake to discover nobody is using their content.

Where are people going in lieu of Youtube?

NASA faked the moon landings, UFOs, Elvis is not dead, JFK second shooter, Marilyn Monroe murdered by FBI/CIA. These are examples of some of the most popular conspiracy theories from the US from over half a century ago. Apparently early 19th century US politics was also rife with conspiracy theories.[0] This even happened in Rome: Mark Antony and Octavian battled with each other using misinformation. [1]

[0] https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/conspiracy-theories-a...

[1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/aaf2bb08-dca... (amp link bypasses paywall)

You didn't used to be able to find communities of like-minded David Icke fans, either. My father was a big David Icke fan, and he talked to my brother and me about it all the time; I can't even imagine how all-consuming it would have been for him if he'd ever have been able to get on a forum and talk to people about it.

They attempted, but they generally didn't have multi-billion-dollar corporations helping them spread their message.

And that's ok. They don't need that today either.

Oh, yes, those lunatics claiming Earth is circling the Sun, and claiming thousands of worlds are out there, similar to our God-chosen . Heretics, society is better without them spreading their nonsense ; deny them their voice, or burn them at stake

Could you explain the argument that you are trying to make?

I'm not sure how scientifically confirmed theories are equivalent to, in many cases overtly disproven, conspiracy theories.

When you say something that is inconvenient to those in power then one way for them to deal with is to label you as a conspiracy theorist. These confirmed scientific theories weren't always confirmed and there was a time when they were quite inconvenient to those in power (the church). The parent poster is making the argument that it's easy to label true information as a conspiracy theory too. Even to this day there are many people who think evolution is a lie. What do you think it was like when Darwin was alive? Now think about the fact that many people have been killed because they were accused of practicing witchcraft.

Yeah, I'll take 9/11 truthers over that.

It might not be as relevant what the specific media is (internet, TV, print, etc.) so much as how dominant that media is.

So it could be the case that in the past conspiracy theorists didn't have access to the most dominant media (e.g. broadcast TV) while today they do.