The fact that you can read about the same topic in several (more often opposing) ways is already a reason to red-flag the piece in the first place. This isn’t readily available through any of the current newspapers. Everyone has an opinion.
I would happily pay for an aggregator that simply ejects facts (stated facts, not truths) from the stories. Then combines that with similar other pieces.
There is already the AP news ticker, or Reuters. Bloomberg has the same thing for financial matters. If you read only that, you will die of boredom.
Would you otherwise prefer to read Russian propaganda speaking of German authorities policing Germans of Russian heritage? Because that's exactly what they are currently doing.
0 facts, amazing opinionated narrative in multi-paragraph form. Pictures on top of that. But that definitely sounds more fun. Moreover - that sort of narrative is way closer to the general sentiment of the working classes who are generally predisposed towards learning about how "the Man" is taking advantage of them in the first place.
The only narrative is the selection of what facts to report. Without that you get lost in the deluge and get equally uninformed.
Nice try, but this is missing the whole point. This is the crux of the matter and the problem with the category of "fake news", and precisely why this ontology is garbage.