A singular "objective truth" never existed. That’s the basis of historiography.
Publications can be "palatable" while not fitting one’s "worldview". The goal of reading should be to be challenged. You can find interesting things anchored in many theoretical frameworks and I encourage people to read editorials spanning different political leanings.
To answer the original comment, I personally read and enjoy The New Yorker and grab the LRB and the Economist from time to time on top of what I read in my native language.
PROSPECTUS of a weekly paper, to be published every Saturday, and to be called THE ECONOMIST, which will contain — First.—ORIGINAL LEADING ARTICLES, in which free-trade principles will be most rigidly applied to all the important questions of the day ...
<https://web.archive.org/web/20181105190846/https://www.econo...>
I'll also note that I find the Economist to be among the better sources I read, and its (broadly-advertised) advocacy isn't as obnoxious as in some other pubs or institutions which come to mind.
If you like soccer, The Blizzard