Arguably, a track record for accuracy is the exact opposite of what policymakers and other influentials would want to use as a metric, because it is not dynamic and it would reduce their options.
In terms of echo chambers, I have been through a few of them, every "scene" is an echo chamber of sorts, and they aren't local anomalies - they are an overall effect on everyone of the general fragmentation of discourse. People who watch mainstream news exist in as much of an echo chamber as those who get their news from 4chan because there is so little crossover between the two groups. It's that lack of crossover and interaction of which echo chambers are the effect. They aren't really chambers, they are more like a grid of conceptual wells of varying depth, where you need a certain intellectual energy to reach the necessary escape velocity to leave one and see the others up close. Polarization makes those wells deeper, and hence harder to interact with people in nearby ones.
The people capable of this this are a politically irrelevant minorty and are more likely to be used as exotic scapegoats than allowed to distort the local echoes. The more interesting question is, what is a viable strategy for a person who indexes on the things that others can't see?
Survive, certainly, but it also means you need a reliable exit from any echo chamber you visit, as they all work pretty much the same way, and at some point they're going to need a scapegoat, so keep a couple of outs handy. There isn't a lot you can do for them, and engaging too long just takes on risk of being marked among the impure when they do their purges.