One of the claims I've seen downplaying the influence of misinfo is that most ppl aren't "falling for" misinfo, they're merely agreeing w/ claims that align w/ their priors. But, that's recursive, imo. What info informed their misinformed priors in the first place, if not misinfo?

This is a great point. We agree misinfo is generally pretty effective. It’s also part of the architecture we propose that people tend to *reject* claims that if accepted, would be crushing for their worldview.