Consensus Over Evidence in Identity Claims

In high‑salience identity controversies, media and institutions increasingly treat social consensus and status (official statements, Indigenous leadership claims, 'social archaeological consensus') as sufficient proof, sidelining forensic or methodological standards. That default makes certain narratives effectively unchallengeable in public debate and pressures reporters to perform allegiance rather than conduct verification. — If this becomes the norm, accountability mechanisms (journalism, courts, science) weaken, civic trust erodes, and public policy risks being built on asserted moral authority rather than replicable evidence.