To me, a news source is someone who tells me what the current stories are, and points me in the direction of the source documents......."
That is so cool poster Cecilie.
So, those news sources that tell you 'what the current stories are'....would be, ummm, who?
You can share here, as it could be instructive to other posters who perhaps don't have the ability or resources you do.
In short, you could mentor any number of them in how to form an informed opinion.
It could be good for you.
----------------------------
Now, as to you still waiting for my poor avatar to, in your words: " to say something about the thread topic..."
Well, that's my fault if I hadn't been adequately clear on my opinion about that unfortunate misguided woman's tragic death. It was a tragedy multiplied---for her, of course, but also her family, and also the uniformed officer. Her absorption in the Big Lie of a fraudulent election led her, inexorably, to violently breach that door. And the unsurprising bullet.
I thought I was clear on that, when I posted this above:
"So focus, girlfriend. We are talking about the January 6th Insurrection and the defensive shooting of a rioter who had violently breached an entryway despite police warning her not to and even pointing a firearm at her..."
Perhaps, and I mean no disrespect, poster Cecilie, but perhaps.....I should use a larger font for you?
Just sayin' 
Let me first of all make it explicitly clear, since it's obvious that you don't have the reading or the social skills to have picked up on it previously: You are not someone to whom I have any need to defend or justify myself on anything, and you have zero standing to demand such from me, however "cleverly" you believe you've phrased it.
However, I will generously give you a free crash course in "How to Research a Subject to Find the Facts, Instead of Blindly Parroting Talking Points", to make up for the apparent lack of that skills training in your life previously. No need to thank me, and I will expect in future that your posts will contain fewer unsubstantiated assertions.
I start with The Daily Wire. They are a conservative opinion site, but they're also quite honest and unabashed about saying so. Pretty much all of their articles are reports on and reactions to stories being run on mainstream media sites or on social media, and they always contain links to the original story/video. If there is a source document being referenced by the original story, they also include a link to that, something that mainstream media articles often don't have. That's extremely helpful in stories originating from government websites, which aren't known for being user-friendly and can be a pain in the ass to run a search on. They also routinely provide links to information about stories that the mainstream site they're reporting on did not bother to provide.
I also go to Townhall.com. Also a conservative opinion site, also very honest about it. Their articles are also usually about stories originally run in mainstream media or on social media, and also invariably include links to the original story, to the source documentation if there is any, and to other information about the story that didn't appear in the original story.
In addition, I have the Google News app on my phone, which provides me a list, updated throughout the day, of the top stories being reported on that day and has a "full coverage" option you can click on to get links to other stories about the same topic. Google News is not remotely honest about their own bias, but it would be rather hard to miss from list of links they provide. Nevertheless, it does make me aware of any stories in the news that I haven't already heard about.
Finally, there's social media and this message board. I don't have Twitter or - God forbid - Tiktok, but I do have Facebook and a wide variety of friends, ideologically speaking. They're usually a good barometer of what people are talking about. USMB is usually talking about stories I've already heard about from one or more of the other places, but on occasion someone will bring up something more obscure. That usually necessitates me hunting up the source documentation on my own, since posters on here tend to be bad about providing useful links.
Again, whatever sites you want to use to find out what's in the news and what people are talking about, there are a few rules to keep in mind:
1) Diversify. It's fine to read news and opinion sites which agree with you, but it's also important to find out what people who don't agree with you are talking about, and what they're saying. As a conservative, I don't have to work especially hard to find a representation of left-wing news, thought, and opinion; it would be harder to avoid it.
2) Drill down on the story. Read the entire story, and then read what the other side of the argument has to say, and then go read the source documentation. Far too many people just read one headline, or maybe the headline and the first couple of paragraphs, and then run out and start proclaiming that as absolute truth.
3) Never take anyone's word for anything without substantiation. This should be self-explanatory.
Also, for the record, I derive no benefit whatsoever from educating dunces on how to function like thinking adults rather than hive drones, and I can't imagine why you think I would. Whatever lets you justify your existence, I guess.
Now, in exchange, you can list for me any right-leaning sources you frequent on a regular basis.
