[SamuelAdams]

This Wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events

It’s not perfect, but Wikipedia does a good job of being neutral and sticking with facts.

On forums like HN, Facebook and Reddit, I rarely bother with correcting people. The sites are not tailored towards factual information, they’re tailored towards engagement. And dis-information is more engaging (people argue about it) than straight facts.

[WithinReason]

RSS feed to it: https://www.to-rss.xyz/wikipedia/current_events/

[exodust]

> "And dis-information is more engaging (people argue about it) than straight facts."

Odd statement. People generally don't enter a discussion with the intention of "engaging with disinformation". They are intending to engage in discussion.

Sometimes facts are agreed, with contested implications; other times contested facts and exchange of evidence informing those facts.

> "The sites are not tailored towards factual information."

Tailored? See, we could right now engage in a discussion about "fact tailors" and whether they exist. And if they do exist, is the art of tailoring not about adjusting presentation in a manner that suppresses unsightly truth so the end result looks good?

> I rarely bother with correcting people.

In other words, you're denying those people the opportunity to be corrected by you!