How Do You Find the "Truth"

There's been a lot of talk lately about the validity of documents found online. A lot of this has spread from the "Rathergate" incident where bloggers rose to challenge the assertions of CBS Reporter Dan Rather. On other fronts, Wikis are growing in visibility and, for many, they are increasingly becoming a source of information. Your average search on Google returns up tens of thousands of results, which one do you visit first (is it always the first one?).

The thorn that's stuck in my mind, really, is what process people are using for determining what is right and what is wrong. Do we validate information based on the content, the source, or something in between. Can a reliable source spew lies? Can good content come from an otherwise crackpot?

I don't have a definitve answer to this question (nor do I believe there is one), but I am interested in uncovering the patterns that might exist in how we resolve information issues.

On that same note, are there certain mediums that are more "trustworthy" than others. Do you prefer blogs to forums, news sites to blogs, newspapers to news sites? I'll reserve my thoughts on how I think this works for a later date.

For now, the world is your stage.