I tend to agree with your first point, and feel that for user-driven content, allowing users to submit context to be displayed below the source is a good middle-ground.

As for the second point, I think that most critical thinkers understand that the laptop changed hands several times, undermining the "news" of the matter.

As far as I am aware, the laptop's original owner has not denied that the content that's been made public is genuine. If the info had been tampered with, I think Hunter Biden would have said so.

He actually recently filed a lawsuit claiming that Giuliani et al altered data.

https://apnews.com/article/hunter-biden-laptop-lawsuit-94fbf...

"The suit filed in California also claims Biden’s data was “manipulated, altered and damaged” before it was sent to Giuliani and Costello, and has been further altered since then."

How was/is Hunter Biden "electoral news". He never ran for office.

His father did, and was involved in his son's business deals.

But, Jared is fine... right?

No he's not, I can't stand the guy and Trump 160% deserves major flak for letting him within 100 miles of power.

the biden laptop story was temporarily banned for less than 24hrs as it violated various twitter rules for hacked content and nudity. The “Twitter Files” (cue x-files theme) show us this - it was certainly not banned because users reported it as fake news using a tool like this.

From Twitter yes. But NYPpost being banned and 50 intelligence agencies saying it had all the hallmarks of Russian Disinformation kept the ball out of the court until after the election.