I have been burned in the past by citing GP and then discovering the report I was citing was false and having to retract my claim. So I am reluctant now to trust them.
GP is the journalistic equivalent of a shotgun. Not all the pellets hit the target, but they spray them anyways.
They have a long record of rehashing the work of others and sometimes it is right and sometimes it is wrong.
They also love very hyperbolic headlines that do not always match the content or rehash in the article.
Mixed bag. I don’t ignore them completely, but I always look for more sources on the stuff that is most interesting.
You are not alone in your skepticism.