I keep hearing how Clinton got much more of the popular vote than Trump did, and I certainly
don't want to sound cynical, but who said so?
The fact is that over the last few decades we have all been lied to, time and time again.

Trump's election has been valuable in focusing a spotlight on 'media', 'fake news', social network 'news'.

You don't need to be a philosophic idealist to question the nature of all information: now in the 'real' world intelligent people have been forced to address the quality, origin and intent of all data. Trump's questioning and loud disputation of any piece of information WORKS, partially because much of the information that we call 'news' actually is garbage and partially because people can't be bothered to 'credentialize' and partially because people just want to hear whatever supports their beliefs.

The U.S. populace has long embraced an enormously successful 'fake news' about U.S. exceptionalism, Democracy and equal opportunity.

As you point out, because of Trump the elites are now communicating a variety of 'fake news', whereas Hillary would no doubt have stayed 'on script'.

I believe there is a qualitative difference between NY Times reporting and some 400 lb Facebook writer in his New Jersey bed. I do, however, admit that with the corporate influence on media, the distinction is grayer and slimmer than ever before.