This is interesting, but I'd love to see a different take on the idea of binary "this is wrong" and "this is right".

Take [1] for example, it lists the source as [2]. However, the source as claimed in [2] is reported as:

"Department of Health and Human Services confirmed".

You might not want to turn it into a "wikipedia", but it would be nice to offer the following:

1) Wrong reports and right reports - a list of sources that suggest whether the claim is factually sound or not (this could be news reports like CNN). You can pull together many sources in a given topic to support a claim

2) "Authority sources", for example, DoJ or other official information distributors that are claimed in an article.

3) "Linked news sources" - These days, many news sources are rehashes of rehashes, sometimes there are 4/5 chains before you get to the "authority" source (reported by the Verge which was detailed by Tech Crunch which was first outlined by AReallyCoolBlog). It would be nice to have a "trail" of where the news/source/information came from, and how many links there are in the chain.

[1]: https://ontherecord.live/17

[2]: https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/31/politics/drive-thru-coron...