> In the end, the story's spread can be explained by a journalist's simply misunderstanding that made the story much more virulent.

Bollocks, you're letting the "journalist" off way too easily. That toothbrush story was simply "a story too good to vet", meaning, sure, the author had a convenient excuse blaming it on a "misunderstanding", and while I don't believe the author was necessarily lying, I do believe they had no incentive to dig any more deeply because the toothbrush bot army story was already clickbait enough.