[jdulej]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

I dunno - I just checked duck duck go vs. google and typed in "what is treason." On the first page of results (I rarely ever check a second page), most of the links were the same. Both of them offered wikipedia in the top 3.

I checked "insurrection" (just that word by itself) on duckduckgo. Got these, in order: merriam-webster definition, followed by yahoo news, kansas city news, and business insider (all 3 links to videos), followed by 4 more dictionary definitions, followed by a CNN report, a history.com report, another CNN report, a gatewaypundit report, and an abc report.

On google, I got - in order: a definition, then a merriam-webster definition, then yahoo news, star advertiser news, and msnbc news (all 3 links to videos/reports), followed by npr, then cambridge dictionary definition, then wikipedia, then youtube, the NYTimes, then MSNBC, then vocabulary stuff about the word itself.

Now, considering that I don't read the gateway pundit ever, and I refuse to read the NYTimes because you have to pay to subscribe and I won't pay, you can cancel those two out. What's left over? Both of them value CNN enough to put them on the first page of results, and both value Wikipedia enough to put them on the first page of results.

I'm not seeing bias there at all.

You should take a look at The Guardian (a bit lefty, but they try to be fair) and BBC. Neither have paywalls yet.
In defense of paywall, these news sites do have to pay their bills. The supported free viewing for a long time but I fully understand why they stopped. Used to pay for a newspaper, now pay to see decent, vetted news online.