I remember there being a bunch of websites dedicated to doing this, though I am not using any of them. AllSides is I think the example that I have been referred to most often.
Speaking about things that I do often do:
In AI Alignment we luckily have the AI Alignment Newsletter, which seems to cover basically everything happening in the field
Depends on what you call "the field": there's a fair number of judgment calls on my part, and the summaries are definitely biased towards things I can understand quickly. (For example, many short LW posts about AI alignment don't make it into the newsletter.)
In Superforecasters, Tetlock describes one superforecaster as having built a collection of automated scripts and sources to get useful information from a variety of different sources and different perspectives. This seems very useful and I'd like to emulate it.
I'm looking for a generalizable approach where, given a specific topic (ex. AI) I can curate sources (ex. Twitter accounts) that maximizes diversity of points (ex. different perspectives on AI Alignment risk). I'd like to avoid the bias where I only use sources that are well known and popular, which seems particularly likely to happen in cases where I am not familiar with the field
I have a few different tactics in mind, but I haven't yet settled on a cohesive strategy, and am interested in suggestions, in particular if you've done this before.