If you think the sites I use are fringe you're loving stupid
I don't know the sites you're using, so understandably I have to fill in the blanks a bit here. But when someone introduces me to a new right-wing alternative news site, it's fringe and full of conspiracy theories. My experience is not a representative sample, but generally the non-fringe alternative news sites are just called 'news'. The 'alternative' tagline is what sets off the alarms in my head.
The bigger problem is that 'non-corporate' doesn't really mean anything in terms of their credibility. It means they're so small that it doesn't make financial sense to incorporate or become an LLC. This also means that they're small enough that nobody is going to care or properly investigate when they publish something like PizzaGate which is completely made-up. The only incentive is to publish incendiary, untrue content geared towards getting more and more clicks from an increasingly partisan viewer-base so that their advertisements make more money.
Like, forget, when CNN or Fox writes an article that is untrue, they receive massive amounts of flack and are socially pressured into revising what they've published. But for every misleading article that CNN or Fox publishes, you can bet there are a thousand, equally-bullstuff articles written by some dude in a trailer who owns his own 'alternative news site'. The difference here is in the survivorship bias. When a major news site forgets up, we generally know about it. When the small guys forget up, it goes completely unknown.
Poll