For me, when I do read articles and there's something that doesn't sound right, I'll go and look up those bits and pieces. The hard part (nowadays anyway) is that having to use multiple search engines to weed out click bait articles, search engine bias (google, I'm looking at you), and finding articles that provide more information on what I'm looking for with solid references.
I don't try and say "media bias" or whatever bias for the sake of stifling the conversation, but when you know that a source that's being used as a counterargument is slanted in one direction versus providing real facts, then I guess you could say that's another way of introducing a circular argument.
To answer your question in regards to news sources that I consider fair are ones that bring up more information and provide sources that you don't often see in mainstream news sites. Bias is everywhere unfortunately, but it's looking beyond that for just the information that's a challenge. I think it's just that I'm in the minority within this thread, because I'm not a Hillary supporter. I think what gets lost is that people don't recognize the attacks from all the media outlets on Trump and his campaign to knock him out of the race. Those are the same tactics that have been used against Dems and Repubs for years. Those tactics are what keep good people from gaining traction (from any party) and the main reason why we're always asking "Why do we always have crap to choose from?" every election cycle.
If they were actually trying to mislead people they would bury Breitbart.
