Fact Checking

[Revmitchell]

But this is exactly why I object to calling this stuff "fact checking" . . . and especially why I object to other journalists who say "Fact checkers have said that this is [true, or not true]" without doing any of their own checking. The fact checkers are not subject matter experts; they're spending a couple of hours doing research on the internet. They aren't qualified to parse the various claims on hundreds of different topics, and they couldn't possibly be.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/10/19/more-fact-checker-fail.html

_____________________________________________________

This thread is not about the main topic of the article linked to. It is about fact checking. The author of the article makes a good point of which I quoted here.

1. What are your thoughts on fact checking to include sites like snopes?

2. Should we be simply quoting them as if they are the final authority on the issue or should we be following up and doing our own research each and every time.

3. Is quoting fact checkers like factcheck.com, Wiki, or even snopes the same as citing sources in a professional research paper?