I do pay, just to alt-media companies that I respect more than the NY Times. MSM won't get my dime while they push political agendas instead and target the opposition.
Because that's what we're losing. The idea that JoeBlowKnowsTheTruth.com holds the same level of accountability, rigor, and seriousness as an actual news organization is what's gotten us into this mess.
The big MSM companies know they have the power to spread fake news and have a good amount of people blindly believe.
Some of these alt-media sites are political and put a spin on stories as well.
In other words you are looking for journalists who are good at winning prizes from their peers. But this risks becoming a self-contained system where journalists are "reputable" because they parrot what other "reputable" journalists think.
If IronWolve pays for journalism from sites that strike him as being thorough and trustworthy, then IronWolve's own judgement is as (small) exogenous contribution to the system.
Of course it is also possible that IronWolve is a fool who pays for foolish journalism. But if so, then that's his problem.
I think you're missing the difference between journalism and editorialism. The latter has become our standard of "news" nowadays. A quick glance at the top alt-media sites shows literally nothing but unsourced, opinion driven fear mongering and click bait. It's not about winning awards or thinking "correctly", it's about operating within the bounds of good faith arguments, and adherence to ethical standards agreed upon by society at large. You can enjoy all the political opinions you wish, but don't confuse them with fact based news reporting.
The decline of integrity in mainstream media is actually what has gotten us into this mess. If the quality of mainstream news reporting did not decline so widely there would not be a vacuum for sites like JoeBlowKnowsTheTruth.com to draw an audience.
News organisations and their journalists are completely responsible for the scenario and trying to blame anyone else is just a scapegoat for their own bad work, the consequences (decline in readers/revenue, journalist layoffs) are theirs to face.
I think you mean, mostly (with a few exceptions), tell the truth? I feel like you're likely searching specifically with news agendas you agree with, rather than reading a broad range of mainstream sources and pulling the threads together yourself.
I mean, if you really want very dry, just fact news, follow a news agency [1], but I suspect you don't really want facts...