The "left" and "right" political descriptors are often problematic in this sense, since they are relative terms. If you ask my conservative parents where CNN is, they'll describe it relative to their own placement on the spectrum. But an eye-of-the-beholder center is problematic for communication, so how should one determine the middle? A mean? Median? Something else?

But that doesn't even address a dependent problem of the quantifiablilty of a political ideology. You can't boil a belief into a number; why do we pretend that polotical ideologies fall on a soft numberline? A libertarian may "lean left" on marijuana legalization, but "lean right" on gun control.

Indeed, the left-right dichonomy's inability to house non-linear opinions or ideas leads to a lot of confusion, especially so in journalism. Where does a factual, source based news outlet lie on the spectrum?

If you're going to state that a widely accepted opinion is "factually wrong" you should probably expand your argument.

Why do you think they aren't left wing? They are certainly not pro-Trump for instance.

See https://www.adfontesmedia.com and their methodology section.

I really don't think someone's blog is a canonical source on media bias:

https://www.adfontesmedia.com/about/

Oh, so 30 minutes ago and three posts up you thought "Google could definitely do something to democratize this valuable real estate, but they don't."

But, suddenly, you realise the importance of large media brands and their reputation?

That's actually a good point! That doesn't mean every independent source is equally valid though. In this case, I asked for an argument as to why CNN and the Washington Post weren't left wing and got a link to a blog with instructions to read the methodology section (which I did and wasn't impressed).