I agree there is a significance about the access to news.
Now if we aren't sure about something we can Google it, but we also have a much wider scope of news. Prior to fairly recently most people got their news from the one tv news bulletin. Some people read papers (but no one in my family did except one uncle who read the news of the world).
Maybe 6 news items came to the BBC bulletin each day which was very uk focused, now we see hundreds of smaller pieces of news daily with a much more global outlook
If you miss remembered something like Nelson Mandela it might be years before you came across a news article that challenged that belief
It's an important phenomenon that shows the real nature of how memories work.
The poster above with the britney thing is a good example, the memory is 100% there. To the extent that they assumed it was edited out of new videos, even when they found one that they personally recorded it doesnt shake the false memory. She knows it isn't true but the memory exist completely still
All human memory works like that. Its why different family members recall the same event 100% differently and can have blazing rows in which they all believe they are right.
It's an important political phenomenon because it shows that its fairly easy to get 1000's of people to be 100% convinced of an idea, and argue that idea to others even if it didn't happen.
Most of the examples we have are trivial eg crisps, celebrity facts because that's something that lots of people remember together and is easy to identify as false because of the ease of accessing such information on line. However whole recollections of history have been re written (some interesting ww2 examples where the accepted truth now is clearly not what was documented at the time), court cases have been won, public favour has been changed etc. There are lots of things we know to be true that aren't from family dramas, to national events but we don't have the ability to Google it