I think a diversity of sources, even if they include stuff like Andrew Tate, is better than the tiny number of sources we had years ago.
Sounds uncomfortable but I think it is an axiom that a healthy information landscape does include mavericks and idiots and also shady ppl - for two reasons:
1. "Good information" sources can easily become bad if we don't challenge them constantly.
2. We say consumers of information need to maintain the fitness of our our critical thinking.