In that video you link to she’s talking about Wikipedia. I think her generalization is inappropriate, but her central point is a sound one: it’s crucial to Wikipedia’s purpose that Wikipedia does not seek truth directly, but aims to be an accurate summary of the best sources available.
You mean accurate summary of the best sources available _which support the desired narrative_ - and therein lies the rub. WP had been infiltrated by a Nomenklatura which makes sure things published on the site follow the Party line and one of the tools used to enforce this is the so-canned list of perennial sources which bans or warns against the use of sources which do not fit the desired narrative, usually under claims of 'inaccuracy' or 'bias' which would be just as applicable to the narrative-amplifying sites they explicitly allow as being 'factual'.