Has conspiracy culture really changed, or is it just more visible now?

I’d be careful about treating the older scene as one thing. Anti-government suspicion was a strong thread, but people came to conspiracy theories from very different directions and did not necessarily agree on much else. Looking back can also make the parts that fit that image seem more central than they were.

There may be a real change in which voices are most visible, but that is not quite the same as every kind of conspiracy-minded thinking changing its politics.

One possible explanation is the way online attention gets rewarded. A careful, narrow question about power is harder to package than a dramatic story about a famous person or a cultural threat. If a community’s most visible material is shaped by clicks and repeat engagement, the tone can shift even if plenty of members still distrust institutions.

That is a plausible mechanism, not proof that any one actor is steering the conversation.

Distrust can become selective. Someone may distrust institutions they see as controlled by political opponents while trusting leaders, media, or organizations that feel like part of their own side. From the outside that can look like a move away from anti-authoritarianism, even if the person still describes their outlook as distrustful.

So I’d ask less whether suspicion disappeared and more who is being treated as the exception to it.

There’s also a visibility problem. Familiar, sensational topics travel easily, while less shareable discussion about institutions may be harder to notice. And the older scene had plenty of sensational claims too, so the contrast can get exaggerated by memory.

I’d call it a change in emphasis and audience as much as a clean break. Different circles may be moving in different directions at the same time.