Having said all of that, some news sources have less spin. I like Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/. I think they are more similar to a wire service than a "we cater to your worldview" brand.
As an American, I sadly find that the UK's Guardian have better coverage of what is happening in the US than most US "news" papers and websites. That being said, The Guardian have some of the most maddening identity-politik editorials. One of my "favorite" Guardian editorials was Syreeta McFadden's piece about how film stock is racist because doesn't pick up the details of black faces. (Maybe learn how to use a camera, Syreeta. These are these things called F-stops and shutter speeds). I also "enjoyed" abortion columnist Jessica Valenti's recent piece in which she mentioned that her friends carry tote bags bearing the slogan "Lord, give me confidence of a mediocre white man." ...but I digress...
The intercept is an interesting read. While it certainly has a very strong point of view, you can be sure that they're not working for "The Man".
BTW, someone where mentioned the Washington Post. Have a look at this before you tout WP as unbiased: https://theintercept.com/2016/07/22/oil-lobby-paid-washingto...