Except the site specifically tries to debunk incorrect narratives.
They too try to "debunk incorrect narratives" (as they see it).
Why trust some random non-expert volunteers running a site and their citations (which could be biased).
"If an organization like Snopes feels it is ok to hire partisan employees who have run for public office on behalf of a particular political party and employ them as fact checkers where they have a high likelihood of being asked to weigh in on material aligned with or contrary to their views, how can they reasonably be expected to act as neutral arbitrators of the truth?"
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/12/22/the-dai...
"Except the site specifically tries to debunk incorrect narratives"
to
"employees who have run for public office on behalf of a particular political party and employ them as fact checkers"
I think we achieved something important here, in spite of it all.