I've seen over the last few years, members of congress and others, using news articles as sources of factual information in official testimonies. Additionally, news organizations regularly repeat their own spin on something, and I've seen it take hold just by virtue of the repeated communication setting it's own context. Is there anything preventing a strong, repeated narrative that goes against fact, from being taught in the future as fact, without a strong resistance to dispute it? I'm sure there are example where this happened in early history that we're taught right now in schools as though it's fact, but there's nobody left to dispute it.
One example currently up for grabs, may be the Coronavirus Wuhan Lab debate. It's strange to debate a fact, whichever way it really is - but are we going to round off/settle on "yes" or "no" as fact, what is going to keep that from going into history books if the result ends up really as "unknown", but those that can be heard are just saying "false"?