Yes, but requires careful checking. I always check multiple sources. Often the bias is simply the order and emphasis put on specific stories.

There are several good sources of news that are now and always have been 99% reliable. But everyone has become their own publisher with "social media" and share the crap they pick up from others that freakin' made it up. This allows people to filter, invent and promote their own twisted angles with no repercussions. And for those other entities with far more evil intent to cheaply and quickly dominate the social media with intentionally-misleading garbage. It's up to us to fact-check and challenge the lazy fake-news spreaders. Here's a helpful guide. Not perfect, but helpful.

Question everything.

Sadly, I rather doubt it, in this day and age of instant gratification. Welcome to the community by the way.

I think it's also the framing of the facts that makes a difference. The same known facts could be reported two different ways, eg.

"Burglar armed with a screwdriver is killed by elderly homeowner protecting his dementia suffering wife"

and....

"Knife welding ex forces 72 year old chases down burglar who dies from the stab wounds in the street".

Yes. This is the world we now live in.

I trust MSNBC and CNN above all else.

Sometimes

Experience teaches us which news sources tend to be reliable and which do not. Before I would believe it, I would fact-check everyword that comes from Fox "News."

I do not find it to be fictional however it is glorified beyond the original account. For instant, the ICBM alarm was sounded in Hawaii a few months back the news kept making like Trump sounded the alarm. In reality on page 4 in tinny print, a worker at the destination site set the alarm off by accident.

When Reagan/Bush ended the "Fairness Doctrine", it let news covereage drift out ot extremist viewpoints, and without rebuttle, new sources put less effort into fact checking (Fox doesnt' do it at all), and so our news sources have becoem mroe liek super market tabloids.

About the only sources left for good factural reporting is ht eBBC or NPR, but they are slipping too.

Why are you in need of community acceptance?

I tend to believe news sources that report events in a strictly factual manner without a bias for either "side." I always check to see where any social media "news" post originated. If it's a well-known publication (e.g., WSJ, USA Today, NYT, NPR, BBC), I will read it. I discount articles posted by obviously slanted publications (e.g., Vanity Fair) even if I tend to agree with their opinions. I ignore anything from a site I don't recognize because I doubt that it will be unbiased and factual. Journalism, she ain't what she used to be.

I am not disheartened at the news of reputable papers or cable outlets. If they get something wrong they will correct it. It is a matter of paying attention.

Welcome to the asylum. Enjoy your stay.
I check most news stories for their credibility, regardless of their source.