No. That is a part of journalism, but not the only "job" of journalists. The best journalism, for example, derives new facts from existing ones (or from debunking lies)...this is an extrapolation beyond just reading through a list of assertions and checking true/false. And a lot of journalism is the conveyance of information for the record, factual or not.

Edit:

To use a software dev analogy, non-devs are bemused at the idea that some developer jobs are focused almost exclusively on testing. "Isn't it the job of a software developer to write software that doesn't crash?" they might ask. Well, yes. That is a part of writing good software, and yet the best software dev places have extensive testing practices. Making sure something is broken is a skill all in itself.

This system externalizes the risk of telling the truth. Too many people excoriate journalists who say things they don't want to hear, so too many journalists pander to their audience. This will let the journalists continue to say what their audience wants to hear and blame the algorithm for any uncomfortable truths.