Wikipedia is my usual source when it comes to a cursory search. I mainly use it for simple facts: what party does the politician in question belong to, what offices have they held and when, what state are they currently based in. In the history of the politician it may also have what stances they've held in the past, if they've gone back on those stances, and their history of philanthropy. However, I'm fully aware that since anyone can add to Wikipedia, it can also be changed at will. This means I'll usually go to the bottom of the page and look for references. Whatever issue I have with the legitimacy of the information will most likely have a source I can investigate myself. However, sometimes it does not have a source attached, so I'm unlikely to believe what I read.
If I'm looking for information on a specific event, usually a current one, I'll default to the New York Times. I may simply look up the name of the event, but the website I'm most likely to click on is the NYT. The Guardian, CNN, and the Washington Post are other possibilities, but NYT has the easiest paywall to get around so I'll use this website. I prefer the NYT because it will frequently quote other people so I can hear their thoughts. If a point is made, a counterpoint is usually offered in the next paragraph, so I have to think about both sides of a particular issue.
Tumblr is my main social media due to its simple algorithm that's based in placing posts in chronological order, not by popularity. It's one of the only blogging sites I can still handle because of that. I don't use Tumblr for the news, but sometimes I'll come across a post by someone else about a major event happening in the world. I can go to the reblogs and replies to that post to find a source, so it's nice to have someone immediately attempting to back up whatever I read. It usually links to the NYT, which is why I have that as my main paywalled news source, even though I get around the paywall. I am not on Tumblr to read people's opinions on whatever is happening, so I don't consider it a very high news source for me. However, it usually gives me the initial information that something, regardless of what it is, has happened in the world. Tumblr prompts me to look up the information and try to find a source myself.
History.com is what I use for past events. Everything that's happening now is built on what happened before, so it's vital to understand history. The main subjects that I don't know too much about and have to look for on this website involve events from the 1980s and 1990s. Politics is thoroughly shaped by the generations that are still alive now, but are not at the forefront. However, History.com is difficult to find sources for, and even more difficult to find an application to current events. I'd prefer any of the other sources I've listed over History.com, but recognizing previous decisions by our government is easiest through this website.
I left Twitter about a year ago because I was so thoroughly exhausted with the constant stream of news. However, since this was my primary news source all throughout high school, I would be remiss to not include it. Twitter is difficult to navigate for news, whether it's looking for a source or attempting to understand how others feel about the events. When attempting to research subjects such as the Black Lives Matter movement, I would frequently be subjected to watching people recording deaths and doing nothing to stop them, something that was both honest and horrifying. Looking for a conclusive video documentation of an event is incredibly difficult on other websites, purely because the people who record the events post them on Twitter first. Despite the numerous biases involved in both recording and posting that video, videos can be conclusive evidence of events happening now, and that's key to understanding the current political climate.
Sources:
Picture for the New York Times
