The issue is when you search in places designed to divide and manipulate. More of that doesn't somehow magically enlighten you. Truly it just cements the partisan propaganda.
I have played clue. Your analogy is interesting, yet fundamentally flawed. In the game, their is no partisan dishonesty.
I agree their is more to discover, generally it lies in old books. Books that came out befor this psycho political tribalism, we have today. Good authors do years of research befor writing a book, as opposed to news reporters and writers, who rarely even stop to accurately fact check. Or even worse write about subjective opinion as if it is fact.
I'm not claiming to be magically enlightened. I'm claiming I read varied bias so as to achieve a rounded view of any particular issue.
I think the more sides I read the better. You don't agree. But you would have a hard time telling me the fewer the sources I read the more magically enlightened I can become.
This all came about when you acted like it wasn't factual and Huffington Post was not a credible source and insinuated Fox News was not or at least less so.
Maybe stopping to fact check would be preferable to knee-jerk reactions about bias due to bias.