[wazanator]

Rate the writer not the publisher. Get your users interested in the writings of individuals instead of who they write for. News providing companies are like any other, some workers are lazy and others actually really care.

If Bob is posting fake news block him instead of blocking company XYZ because Cindy who also works for XYZ actually puts out good articles.

Be careful of straying into defamation territory. Don't name and shame. For lack of a better term shadow ban the writer.

[grzm]

I agree that keeping track of writers is important. I currently don't have an easy way to do that. Anyone aware of a source that rates journalists in a centralized manner?

I think it is important to keep in mind the publisher, as they do have a responsibility for choosing the articles and journalists they publish. If it becomes clear that a publisher has a tendency to publish low quality (for various measures of quality), I think it does make sense to take that into account for anything else the publisher may publish.

[wazanator]

Also I would look at how Wikipedia handles news. Not many people are probably aware of it but they do post current news on the front of the site. It's slower to come out then traditional news but it is a good source because of how well they go about citing sources.