I've had better luck with subscription based aggregators, but nothing exciting enough to want to plug one in particular.
Always looking for new options to try.
In that regard, WaPo is pretty good but you can still do better: https://www.adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/
Example: Cops have shot a thousand people a year for several years in a row (maybe a decade). About 300 of those each year have been black, which is a disproportionate amount by some measures.
However, it is nowhere near the biggest problem in our country even for black people. But because the media has chosen to report on that problem near constantly since Colin Kaepernick took a knee, it has dominated the public consciousness and therefore influences thousands of people to loot, burn, protest, riot and thousands more to develop opinions and attitudes that create more and more division in our country.
Most of what they report is factual but is it as important as the lofty position they are giving it in the news? Is it helping?
If you want recent proof, look at that debacle with that Toledo kid. Some reported police shoot an armed thug, some report police shoot an unarmed kid. The video proof shows neither side is telling the whole truth.
This revealing interview gives an interesting perspective on the media business around the turn of the century. Note that this is a pdf archive copy saved to draw attention to a particular segment, and I'd urge you ignore that and rad the whole thing. I can't link to the original as it vanished some time ago, and this archive predates the establishment of the internet archive. Thus the presentation is biased (sorry) but it's the only complete copy of the interview I know of. https://zfacts.com/zfacts.com/metaPage/lib/Weekly_Standard_M...
