> Is it even possible for one side to be worse than the other?

It is.

> Or is it like some kind of natural law that scams are evenly distributed?

But it's also close to a natural law that it's practically impossible to have an even-handed comparison, because the incentives to be biased to one side or the are too hard to resist. That bias often manifests itself as selective attention (e.g. invest time to uncover and report embarrassing true facts about one side, but invest much less time doing that to the other side). Other times it manifests as selective presentation (e.g. when side A does it, it's presented as a massive scandal; but when site B does it, it's presented as much less of a problem).

Of course it's possible. The premise that all sides are equally and perfectly corrupt and that therefore pointing out any specific flaw in any side is merely hypocrisy or partisanship is empty-headed cynicism. "Whataboutism" is a cultural cancer that short-circuits critical thinking.