For example, imagine there was a chili cook-off held in Chattanooga and we “endorsed” one of the contestants. If, in the course of writing a story about the competition, a grocery store receipt somehow “appeared” in our newsroom showing that our favorite contestant’s chief opponent—last year’s champ—had bought canned tomatoes instead of the fresh tomatoes that the competition required, we would have to investigate the validity of the receipt before reporting about it. We would employ several “grocery store receipt experts” in order to determine if, in fact, the chili cooker-offer had broken the contest’s rules. If, to our predetermined satisfaction, the experts said that illegal actions couldn’t be ruled out, and that there was a possibility that the accused had, in fact, purchased canned tomatoes, we would then have a “duty” to report the story.

But if, after reporting the story, information became available that the receipt belonged to another shopper, or that the receipt did indeed belong to the accused but that t