Yeah, journalism always has some inherent bias. But to say that the X community is going to be less biased than a fact-checking organization staffed by journalists whose job is to be neutral (within what's humanly possible), is frankly absurd.
Why is it absurd? Journalists don’t think their job is to be neutral. They are among the most biased. They abuse the trust given to them, which is why they don't deserve it. Community notes allows a diversity of opinions to compete, which is a better way to seek truth.
You are giving too much trust to a small authority group to determine what the "facts" are for the rest of the people.
If these "facts" are so obviously facts, we wouldn't need a team of researchers to establish the fact whether they are facts.
The fact that these "facts" need to be "fact-checked" means they are so open to interpretation and depend on context, that we came to the conclusion that this "fact-checking" concept in fact does not really work.
You can still "fact-check" for yourself; do your own research, make up your own mind yourself. Then you will become more of an independent thinker, be less influenced by authoritarian figures.