So where's one to go? I'm seriously asking this question.
if you are simply looking for confirmation of your biases, u-tube is great. The video format on u-tube makes it difficult for the casual consumer of news to fact check. Also, going back and forth to track the narrator's statements is difficult. Most times when I make the mistake of visiting a u-tube vid that your kind cites, it is not informative. The format is most often used to influence rather than inform.
Media bias fact check has a long list of sites that have high ratings for factual low bias news outlets:
These sources have minimal bias and use very few loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using an appeal to emotion or
mediabiasfactcheck.com
From time to time, when searching for information, I'll pull up this list and deliberately randomly select one of the sites listed to read up on a topic.
For myself, I pay for a subscription with Financial Times, a London based newspaper that has high ratings with MBFC. Sites that I go to a lot are Washington Post and less often, NY Times. Huffington Post is pretty biased but factual so I do go there a lot. NPR, especially Morning Edition are good.
Places like realclearpolitics and any u-tube site are just crap to me. Of course, Breitbart and Fox are places I only visit by accident and laugh at a lot.
Regarding the "award winning author" you cited. I didn't watch the video. What I know about Blumenthal is this: he's not a shill but his style is not to report but to tell his audience what he wants them to think. How he can interview somebody like Daniel Ortega and report only glowing truthy bits while completely ignoring the brutality of that man's regime turns me off. He makes no attempt to tell both sides of a story. Also, Blumenthal is definitely an outlier on many of his positions. When one dives into his reports -- assuming the person is objective -- one sees him glossing over or ignoring facts that get in the way of the narrative he wants his audience to hear. So, I call bullshit. If I can't find facts based reports from multiple sites that give both sides of the argument, then I don't give the report much if any credence.
Give me the facts and let me make up my own mind. I want to hear the story from both sides. You don't. All I need to know about you is that you cited a fucking u-tube video from a biased source. I don't think you are a shill or a troll. But I don't think you are a very good source for factual information. If I want to know what the authoritarian left are saying, I think you are a good source.