My measure for a "good source" has changed over time: 1. No news outlet is without bias, but the very least I expect is for them to address other popular point

My measure for a "good source" has changed over time: 1. No news outlet is without bias, but the very least I expect is for them to address other popular points of view (irrespective of what I or others think about them). 2. At least the text version can be accessed without a pay wall. A pay wall is not the proper model for monetization, it prevent discoverability and organic growth. 3. They do original investigative journalism, and not just read tweets. If the news article is reporting on social media, they should make the effort to reach out for comment. 4. Does not use standard pieces of news that are mass published without transformation. I should not be able to search for the headline and find 20+ identical articles - it shows zero effort went into processing the material. 5. Does not have a conflict of interest between their investors and the news they report on. You cannot trust the news companies owned by Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Rupert Murdoch, etc, to report on the people that fund them. 6. Does not politicize individuals who are not publicly known. A random person who makes a bad tweet does not deserve to be mobbed on the national/international scale. 7. Does not defame or add framing further than what is obvious (or at least minimizes it). Maybe there are some others I forget. Some smaller non-mainstream news sources that come close (in my opinion) are Spiked [1] and Quillette [2]. They generally tend to be critical of all positions and range somewhere around the centralist position on most topics. [1] https://www.spiked-online.com/ https://www.spiked-online.com/ [2] https://quillette.com/ https://quillette.com/