Which news sources do you actually trust?

None of them have blanket trust. Read each article, dig through half a pound of bullshit to get to the facts behind the click bait headline. Then see if that makes sense. Seek out second source if the topic requires it.
- this. id say always check more sources if you are in doubt.
  every media company has its own bias (usually influenced by the owner) and you have to know what they are to understand what they will be manipulating or what agenda they will be pushing along with the actual facts. some might be more trustworthy for some subjects but not others.
  factor that in to your reading of the news and you will get a much better view of things.

None in isolation.
CBC is a pretty reliable go-to although they're more than a bit pandering these days. BBC is similar. Al Jazeera is pretty reliable for things not related to Islam and Palestine in particular (although they're not as biased as they could be). AP is fairly neutral. Aside from that, it's non-legacy Canadian sources like the Walrus and the Tyee, which all have their problems but are good at exposing reality.

Peoplesdispatch is one I put high trust into but all reporting is inherently biased and should be read with an understanding of its biases. I also like the Al Jazeera and Jacobin but both of those can be hit or miss sometimes. Especially the Jacobin lmao

As others have said no one source should have blanket trust.
Understanding the bias the source may have by looking up who owns/funds it and understanding how that might skew what you’re reading is important.
For news based on studies I usually will try to directly to the study which should list the methodology which will help show how well done it was.
If I have time later I’ll put together a list of ones I use and what I’ve seen as their biases.

I've stopped paying attention to what any regular news source says about anything themselves since it is all basically profit driven and therefore unreliable. Rather I just pay attention to sources where I can see what is said or done from the horses mouth directly, and then pay attention to people's reactions to such things.
These are usually few and far between, but I'm talking about what was written or said by specific persons with the clear source of it coming from their personally verified outlets.
I also wait on this information before thinking too much about it as well because god knows if someone catches something out for being AI generated or a deepfake or what have you in this day and age. After a few days it gains some actual credibility as coming from that person and being the genuine article.
It is also important to still not trust what any one person says about something else as well, or even multiple persons. I can never really trust what is said by anyone as facts anymore - rather this only gives insight into that specific persons opinions on the other thing.
In the face of mountains of clear evidence and individually verified sources from many multiple persons - then and only then can I begin to trust something as fact.

I don't trust a particular source. I sorta trust GroundNews to at least show me the bias and give me less-overtly-biased alternatives. Otherwise I am more trustful in general (but don't fully trust) investigative journalism orgs like ProPublica, independent journalists like Ken Klippenstein, etc.

Ground News
- Why should I trust Ground News, a for-profit company, on what the media biases are?
  
  I get what you're saying. However, their entire business model is predicated on them being impartial. If it turned out that they were biased, their business would collapse.

None. When was the last time you saw an actual headline not click-bait?
News is not about issues anymore - since the advent of 24 hr TV last century - It's about filling time until the next exposé about Meghan frigging Markle, or some influencer of zero repute who overdosed.

I extend more trust if I see consistent stories across multiple sources. If one is reporting something and no one else is, I question why.

The Conversation is great, though they don't necessarily cover headlines. They look at hot topics and interview experts. It's about making a bridge between science and journalism.

No single source. I like how Verity collates the facts and the spins from multiple sources across the web.

I dont watch international news but in germany, taz amd ND are pretty good. Best track record international i found is 404 media.

Trust to be accurate or trust to be unbiased? I trust the hyperlocal paper to be unbiased but the articles are all over the place. I trust most large publications to be accurate but with their articles and editorials in line with the paper's overall bias.

NPR, NYT, BBC. I have my criticisms, but seldom are these sources factually incorrect.