Snopes and Mythbusters showed how you can actually make entertainment out of "This thing we thought might be true, actually isn't true / doesn't work at all".

Snopes and Mythbusters showed how you can actually make entertainment out of "This thing we thought might be true, actually isn't true / doesn't work at all". As for the fairness issue, my first thought is to have it moderated by scientists but from different fields. It's like we do in other areas, like law. You need an expert on the general process, but if they have any personal connection to the topic at hand, they must recuse themselves. In a sense, it's just a specific type of scientific journal, right? An online journal of only null results.