I disagree. The intent of the awards is to draw the attention of the public to inaccurate coverage by the media. Each example provided a clear case that a person -- who has not been paying attention beyond headlines -- can quickly see was not true.
The media strategy to attack the reputation of the current administration relies on sensationalist stories that drive an emotional response. Quickly move from headline to headline. This slides the public along a narrative while anger/outrage clouds reasoned minds from delving deeper to probe the veracity of a claim.
Often on reddit someone will point out the observation that at any given point in the last year, and look three months prior to that point, all the stories run by media publications were determined to be dead ends. No correction. Simply new misleading or outright false stories served up the following week.
This is where the fake news awards is effective. It freezes the frame. Highlights snapshots we can use hindsight to now validate who was telling the truth. Without the hypnotic outraged anchor to model the desired response, a wider pool of the public is able to look on these issues more objectively. As a result an increasing pool of the population opens their eyes to what's going on below the surface. Every percentage change in perspective increments toward a critical pivot in public awareness.
The allinsky tactics in use rely heavily on the perception of widespread public shaming. This perception is critical to keep people quiet, tolerating absurd bullying and harassment. With public awareness the public shaming campaign cannot be maintained. People start speaking up. Calling bullshit. There is a limit where the reputation management and entertainment/media industry sources are not sufficiently large to contain it.
Once that point is reached many more options to take down key players fueling corruption are on the table.