brent you certainly eliminated 99% of the conventional news, there
A reasonable level of scepticism, critical thinking skills, fact-checking, logic-checking and so on are standard skills to separate the wheat from the chaff when evaluating information and winnowing out disinformation/propaganda from accurate information. The tools are applicable across the board, applicable to both conventional and non-conventional sources.
The tools only work, though, if used.
Reading your statement, which seems to be overbroad (it seems highly unlikely that 99% of what conventional news sources report is inaccurate), I am reminded that there is another factor that needs to be taken into consideration -- mediated experience and attendant bias.
Our experience mediates (that is, filters) our objectivity, and we all bring bias to the evaluation process. It is important to recognize and adjust for our biases when trying to separate wheat from chaff.
Let me give you an example: Because of my own experience growing up in a small, rural town that was under the thrall of the anti-Semitic pastor of the largest church, my extended family's experience during Shoah, and my years-long participation in the fight for equal treatment of gays and lesbians, battling Anita-Bryant type lies and misinformation promulgated by conservative Christian "family" groups, I have a deep mistrust of Christian media and opinion. My mistrust is so deeply ingrained at this point that I don't even recognize it unless I make an effort to do so.
As a result, I have to be very careful, when evaluating Christian media/opinion articles, not to dismiss anything and everything that is reported/opined. I have to "stop, breath, think" and try to objectively evaluate what I am reading, taking special care to recognize my own bias and the impact of that bias on the evaluation process. I am not always successful, and never 100% successful, in doing so. I have to take that into account, too.
I wonder if there isn't an element of bias in your observation, because it seems objectively improbable. That is for you to examine and decide, not for me to lecture you about, though, so my intention in writing this is not hostile or conclusory.