So back to talking about "biased" and "non biased" news sources. I think it's bullstuff when someone completely disregards a news site based on "bias" (I know I've probably done it in the passed but I'm trying to stop). Because in reality just about all news sites are biased. What matters is the content of the article. If it's an opinion piece; sure, you can disregard it because it's some handicaps opinion. But if it uses actual data such as polls and other types of data then you can't just disregard the entire damn article just because you don't like the site that published it. You're going to need a better argument for why the article is wrong because otherwise you look like a complete loving handicap who didn't even read it.
if a site shows clear bias, it's likely that they also have a bias in their selection of information. you can't know for sure if the information they actually have is credible if they show a clear and invested interest in pushing their own agenda, and it's much easier to instead rely on already agreeably credible sources than to waste time proving/disproving the credibility of something
sometimes it's definitely just a cop-out to avoid having to acknowledge something, but if an article/outlet isn't even going to try and hide its bias it tends to be a poor indicator of its validity in general.
