EMH comes in multiple different strengths. The strongest version would be something comical like 'market prices are omniscient and perfectly predict future prices'. That's almost certainly wrong. Very weak versions are something like 'Don't bother actively trading on the news as a retail investor, because by the time you've heard them, the folks over at Goldman Sachs and the hedge funds and their computers will have traded on them a million times over already', and these are almost certainly true. (But even somewhat stronger versions are probably true.)

The “weak version of EMH” has nothing to do with markets being “efficient”, it's a property of random markets. Assimilating the two just Fama's motte-and-bailey fallacy.

That's very, very related to being efficient.

> Assimilating the two just Fama's motte-and-bailey fallacy.

No, not at all.

“No, not at all”.