It is in the interest of these sites to prevent this lobbying, because otherwise they lose credibility. They rely on the amateur work of people (and revenues related to viewers and collaborators) who will desert them if they find themselves harassed and find that they offer biased info and do not fight that bias.

I have always thought that the best solution for Wikipedia, for instance, would be to clone it several times, creating a "free market" of info instead of the current "monopoly". If people can choose which online encyclopedia they feel is better, less biased, nicer to work within, they will desert those that allow the manipulation by propaganda agencies and join the ones that are real collaborative works by independent honest contributors.

The same applies for the rest: lobby-promoted censorship in the long run can only destroy such sites, because people want the real thing, not doctrine.

You're surely right about creating alert networks against Zionist attacks but it would be even better to create alternative sites, preferably not based in the USA, where these lobby activities are strongly discouraged. Personally I'd like a new "wikipedia" with enhanced sensibility to opressed ethnic groups, be them Palestinian, Basques, Berbers, Kurds, Tibetans, Kashmiris, Tamils or Native Americans.