When did the term disinformation start to mean something it doesn't?

Disinformation: false information which is intended to mislead, especially propaganda issued by a government organization to a rival power or the media.

So apparently many of our legislatures are in favor of stepping up and tweaking the Section 230 legislation regarding social media sites. However, rather than require them to follow the laws as they exist within the context of the first amendment, the concept would be to implement new "requirements" that these social media platforms all monitor the user content for disinformation and hate speech. In other words, some in Congress want Twitter and Facebook to double down on their censorship and demand that others follow suit.

Of course the idea seems to be to lump pretty much everything displeasurable to a certain group of people into one category in order eliminate it. If your opinions do not correlate with these thought police, well then you are just out of luck. Some of the Democratic lawmakers have already targeted certain "groups" that social media must ban to stop the spread of misinformation. Obviously no groups have the distinction of being always truthful or always deceitful, so what would be proposed would more more censorship of "people" rather than actually monitoring anything for content.

The reality is that "truth" and "fact" are no longer being treated as they have always been defined. Even the very concept that mathematical constants like 2+2=4 are now being questioned by the new wave of uncritical thinkers who believe that absolute truths and actual accepted facts are pillars of a bygone "white society". Apparently truth and fact must now be filtered based on who might be offended and whether or not certain people are capable of grasping things. If something is too complicated for certain people to understand, then we (as a society) are responsible for accepting what they give us for an answer. The concept of right or wrong (as we understand it) should be replaced with an understanding that technical facts are unnecessary and often times racist. Tell that to an engineer at NASA.

But what do we define as truth or disinformation? I read this in CNN today: 

Biden has put his foot on the gas for Covid vaccinations, radically ramping up vaccination rates despite, as he said in the town hall, inheriting a situation where virtually nothing was set up and there really was no plan.

This is clearly disinformation being spread ad nauseum by certain members of the media. The concept that no plan was in place has been debunked by everyone involved. In fact, the rollout of the vaccine was averaging approximately a million doses a day, and had hit 1.5 million on the final day of the Trump Presidency. As it stands, there has not been any notable improvement in that number and in fact the number of vaccinations under Trump had already surpassed the promised goals that Biden had provided (100 million doses in 100 days) that he would accomplish. This can quite literally be proven by real live statistics and numbers. If you want an example of "disinformation" it is these same media hacks who take the talking points of the Democratic Party and treat is as more credible than actual reality and factual statistics.  

The question becomes is it "disinformation" to state a fact, simply because that fact runs counter to what some want to believe or because that particular fact offends certain people and their sensibilities? While logical people would suggest no, the concept of logic seems to escape those who want to banish "disinformation" as it exists in their mind.  eg: Those who provide real life statistical analysis regarding the 2020 election are routinely flagged as providing disinformation by people who have quite literally done nothing to show that their analysis is wrong. They simply don't like what they see, it makes them uncomfortable, and because it might upset their own narrative, they want it banned. 

Such is the case in many of these arguments over disinformation. The entire narrative that there was "nothing to see" in the 2020 election is 100% disinformation as defined by anyone who still believes that disinformation means something that isn't accurate. It only exists as the truth by those who push the narrative and look to squelch any and all opposing facts, analysis, research, investigation, or opinion. 

The irony is that those who are quickest to demand that certain things be censored or banned because they are labeled to be "disinformation" are generally asking that factual things be censored and banned in order to protect unfounded narratives (that under more normal circumstances would be seen as disinformation).