So now you know how to investigate sources, but investigate what?

It’s not always immediately clear.

Take this example.

An article from a publication called Vulture.

It says that some Canadian schools have banned discussion of ’13 Reasons Why’.

But before we get outraged about this, before we start to have a discussion, lets figure

out whether it’s true.

So, we go to do our originally trick, our just add Wikipedia trick, we pull out the

site name, we’re going to throw that into Wikipedia but we stop, and we stop because

we realize Vulture isn’t really the source of this reporting.

Down here at the end of this first paragraph, we see that it’s according to CBC News.

The information in this article probably isn’t verified by reporters at Vulture.

They’re just reporting on other reporting that the CBC has already done.

So, we have to get closer to the original source by clicking the link.

And here we find the original story.

Now that we’re at the source, we still check what the source is, and what you’ll see

if we plug this into Wikipedia it says ‘one of Canada’s most popular news sites’.

It’s long established, it’s well resourced, it’s got a good reputation.

The point is we go upstream to the source till we get to the point where the people

doing the writing are the people verifying the facts.

We call this the original reporting source.

In this case, that original reporting source is trustworthy, so now we can invest our time

in the article and start thinking about the issue.