UHND.com - Notre Dame Football, Basketball, & Recruiting

appeal to a conservative audience...hence, your preference for news.

Here's an excerpt from a Wiki review of the firm...
-----------------------
2017 to present
In November 2020, The New York Times published an article alleging that since 2017, when many of its "straight-news" reporting journalists were laid off, RealClearPolitics showed a pro-Trump turn with donations to its affiliated nonprofit increasing from entities supported by wealthy conservatives.[28] RCP executive editor Carl Cannon disputed the newspaper's allegations of a rightward turn, saying that he had solicited donations from both conservative and liberal donors, without them "buying coverage".[29] Several journalists who talked to The New York Times in 2020 said they never felt any pressure from the site's founders to bias their stories.[28] Cannon stated that RCP regularly publishes perspectives from both liberal and conservative publications, saying that "the simple fact is that the amount of liberal material published in RCP every week dwarfs the annual conservative content in The New York Times".[29] However, in 2016, the final RealClearPolitics national polling average before Election Day showed Hillary Clinton ahead by about 3 points (Clinton 46.8%, Trump 43.6%).[30]

The New York Times also said that "Real Clear became one of the most prominent platforms for elevating unverified and reckless stories about the president's political opponents, through a mix of its own content and articles from across conservative media..." and that for days after the election, "Real Clear Politics gave top billing to stories that reinforced the false narrative that the president could still somehow eke out a win."[28] Cannon responded by highlighting two articles suggesting that "Trump could somehow eke out a win" on RCP's front page by noting that 374 articles had been covered on its front page between the time of the election and The New York Times' article, including 16 articles from The New York Times itself.[29]

In 2016, RealClearInvestigations was launched,[31] backed by foundations associated with conservative causes, such as the Ed Uihlein Family Foundation and Sarah Scaife Foundation.[32] In 2019, the site published an article by a conservative author, Paul Sperry, containing the supposed name of a U.S. intelligence officer who blew the whistle on the Trump–Ukraine scandal.[32] The article's publication came as part of a month-long effort by Trump allies on media and social media to "unmask" the whistleblower, whose identity was kept confidential by the U.S. government, in accordance with whistleblower protection (anti-retaliation) laws.[32] Most publications declined to reveal the whistleblower's identity; Tom Kuntz, editor of RealClearInvestigations, defended the site's decision to publish the article.[32] Cannon stated that whistleblower protections did not ensure anonymity from journalism, instead guaranteeing protection from firing, prosecution, and professional punishment.[29]
--------------------

The NYT and WaPo still publish...and adhere to...their Journalistic Standards. No need to muddy the waters with questionable sources.