Oh there is a fifth reason, although this could apply to both types: the sender is a complete douchebag.
Or, you might consider NOT placing an always listening piece of spyware into your private home....
Considering the number of slashdot commentators who think that Burger King is the villain in this story and Google the victim, clearly there are few people who consider that a viable option.
Tens of millions of votes for an idiot because the voters were unable to draw the correct conclusions from the available facts
Fortunately, she lost anyway. Unfortunately, the other choice was only minimally better.
What Politifact is commenting on is whether the opinion, belief, or conclusion drawn from those facts is "mostly false".
In other words, Politifact is NOT a FACT checking organization. They are checking whether or not the opinions presented are "correct". If the facts presented in the story are true, I do not need someone else to tell me if the conclusions the author reaches are true or not. If someone is going to claim to be a fact checker, I want them to limit themselves to checking the facts. If they do not, it is just a matter of time, and probably not much of it, before they are calling fake news true because it reaches the "correct" conclusions (or leads people to do so) even though the facts are completely false.
No man is an island if he's on at least one mailing list.