The number of conversations I've had to have with friends and family about, let's say, the "Russian hacking of the election" or "the weapons of mass destruction in Iraq" or "the bulk collection NOT mass surveillance by US intelligence" is greater than even the amount of time I've had to spend speaking to each of them.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/294584001_The_unbea...
It is easy (1x) to create meaningless content, it is harder however to address it and to explain properly why the point was missed.
Building a sound argument, clearly and in a straightforward manner is hard. Understanding the non-sequitur of your interlocutor is hard. Extirping the salient part of the inconsistency will force you to shave off the useless fluff around it.
Adding that fluff is easier, as it only takes intellectual laziness.