This attitude exemplifies the problem with the public discourse. The public discourse isn’t about finding out truth and forming actionable democratic consensus, it is about duping “stupid people” into supporting “good things”™.
There's also this naive commitment to truth. Yes, we want our mental models to be more accurate and predictive. What if a model results in an increase of net suffering? What is the role of a democratic government, to provide services to a society to lessen individual offering, or to pursue truth and align legislation at all costs?
The naive commitment to truth is the most fundamental requirement for the most basic freedom, the freedom to reason. To lie, to deceive someone means to take away that freedom.
I think the true danger is when there is little tension between government and the fourth estate. Government actions need interpretation and presentation, and when those functions lapse or are neglected, is when individuals begin losing the right to reason. To be able to make decisions presupposes that non-elites are presented with the decision in the first place. This is the context within which the naive commitment for truth is a virtue.