Characteristically, I'm inclined to take a wider, longer view..
I think the difference social media has made, in social life, in its widest sense, is often inflated.
The Inquisition, and witch trials, went on for decades, across great stretches of the world, and the main communication technology of that time, was the printing press, which was hardly widely accessible, not least because there wasn't widespread literacy.
Here's a view of the witch trials, which places them in the specific socio-economic historical conditions:
https://www.versobooks.com/blogs/4290-gossip-girls
It shows especially, how the meaning of gossip, was transformed during that time, to the often disparaging view familiar today.
I think the account has some things worth considering. However, I think the wider claims about gossip, workers' solidarity, and #MeToo, are more questionable.
Gossip, including the #MeToo phenomenon, especially the tendency to bundle together everything from verbal misunderstandings, to major acts of sexual violence, is not exactly helpful to many.
It contributes to a divisive climate, where the division isn't between true or false, and undermines due process.
Similar could be said of conspiracy theories, which come from various political directions, but those who purport to 'debunk' them, aren't necessarily much more helpful or different:
https://theconversation.com/were-all-con...ords-33933
I would recommend the book by those authors, which I first read several years ago. Although some of the exchanges in the comments, shows how much confusion is created by the atmosphere of conspiracism, such that the clarity of the article is (wilfully?) misconstrued.
Possibly the worst instance of anti-conspiracists' being barely distinguishable from conspiracists, is a proposal made by someone who was close to President Obama, and is influential elsewhere, including in Britain, to "cognitively infiltrate", a wide range of groups deemed to be promoters of "false conspiracy theories":
https://www.salon.com/2010/01/15/sunstein_2/
It might be highlighted that these links are all from before the present pandemic, but I think they're no less pertinent.
As for instance, in Britain and elsewhere, some of those most enthusiastic for lockdowns, haven't necessarily been helpful to seeing a way out of it, to something approximating previous social life.
In that first link, it is argued that describing #MeToo as itself a witch hunt, is "ironic", because obviously the historical witch hunts were overwhelmingly against women.
However, there are many subsequent historical phenomena that could be described, analogously, as witch hunts, that haven't been so targeted, such as the show trials in Stalinist Russia, McCarthyism, and the 'Cultural Revolution' in Maoist China:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=4srwSkD05ws&t=24s for which there are still, often young apologists:
https://uncommongroundmedia.com/gulags-g...sm-soviet/
Witch hunting from various directions certainly hasn't receded during the pandemic, including against anyone criticising lockdowns, or soberly questioning the original source of the virus.
This could be described as a continuation of 'cancel culture', for which some of the greatest enthusiasts are those in their teens, twenties, and thirties. Hence, I'm less inclined to think that younger generations are necessarily more resistant to tunnel vision.
I don't think there's any one answer. Certainly censorship makes underground martyrs, and would allow social media companies, governments, and state agencies, to exercise more power. Plus, similar to those who seem to want lockdown conditions to continue indefinitely, when and where would it stop. The solution being even worse than the problem.
The starting point can be, to contribute to creating an atmosphere, where the benefits of reasoned discussion, with creditable, empirical references, are demonstrated.
A situation that is not necessarily most appealing to state agencies, governments, and companies, social media and otherwise.