Today, getting information is as easy as opening a browser on your computer/phone, typing in a question and waiting a second for a long list of links to load. These websites will promise to answer your question. But actually, they may not be all that trustworthy. Figuring out which site is believable and which is false takes work. It isn't impossible, though. Actually, it is what every good journalist (新闻记者) does daily. And students and other non-journalists also can do it.
To check a new claim (声明), good reporters contact experts on the topic. In journalism, such experts are known as "sources". This may be a scientist who discovered something new in the lab. Or it could be the witness to a crime.
However, not everything is easy. For instance, if there's a forest fire, how do you know where it started, when and how? You can ask government officials, but they may not know. You can talk to people near the fire shortly after it started. But unless someone spotted the fire as it happened, people may never know for sure. They may simply offer speculation. Saying something "might have" or even "probably" started that fire isn't a fact. So you'd have to qualify any statement about the fire's origins.
I describe such words as "weasel words". These words and phrases include "might" "could have" "was likely to have been", etc. Whenever something isn't known for sure, journalists will highlight their uncertainty by using weasel words. They never over-blow claims to the readers.
A good reporter should be paid for the work he does. Some blogs and even news sites are authored by unpaid writers. Many of these writers are untrained in reporting, and their reports may not provide the depth. Thus, if the news you're reading is free to the world online, consider what that may mean. Overall, you should be skeptical(怀疑的). That's acting like a journalist.
