We were all taught that in good writing you are supposed to make your point, then back it up with facts. A good, hard-hitting investigative journalist will often go one step further, and also verify all statements given to them by third parties. It would be doing readers an injustice to just accept any old statement as fact without getting a second opinion. Take this example from USA Today:

"Many in the Des Moines business community are disappointed about the loss, said Susan Ramsey, a spokeswoman for the Greater Des Moines Partnership, an economic development group.

"I'm very disappointed," said Art Slusark, a vice president at Des Moines-based Meredith Corp."

Do you see what the reporter did here?. I mean, without an actual quote from a member of the Des Moines business community, how would we know that Susan Ramsey's stament that many of them were "dissapointed" was true?. I mean, she may THINK people are disappointed. But they could have just as easily been "sorry", "blue", "chagrined" or "depressed". Thankfully our writer has done his or her research, and has provided a decisive quote which ends our specualtion once and for all. Art Slusark is indeed disappointed. However, does he speak for "many in the Des Moines business community"? Yes, because he is vice president at Des Moines-based Meredith Corp.

American journalism at its finest, folks!