In light of the recent LA Times' publication of an article on Tupac Shakur's death from now-discredited FBI documents, Slate writer Jack Shafer offers precautions for newsrooms to avoid similar situations:

- "Avoid confirmation bias" Though finding evidence that confirms your existing views is obviously better than finding ones that contradict, don't let that blind you. LA Times's journalist Chuck Philips "said in an interview that he had believed the documents were legitimate because, in the reporting he had already done on the story, he had heard many of the same details."

- Know your document's origins. "Until proved otherwise, every document should be assumed to be fake."  In the Times case, though the documents had been filed in court, they were filed by James Sabatino, who is currently doing time on fraud charges.

- "Don't trust documents, trust evidence. A document is only a piece of paper with writing on it" and is not necessarily true.

- "Enlist outside experts."  Newspapers shouldn't allow the leakage of information overshadow larger investigations. "The less a stake an outside source has in a story, the better his critique will likely be."

- Always question why evidence appears "now" and why it hasn't appeared before. "Is it because the source of the evidence stands to gain financially by its publication?" or is the source a "notorious liar"?

Bob Steele of Poynter Online also offers some questions that might be asked in Times's internal investigation.
- "What process was used by the reporter and editor to scrutinize the source of the documents as well as the source(s) for other key pieces of information in the story?
- How did they verify and cross-check the documents?
- Were other editors brought into the process to judge
 He also believes that journalists at other news organizations should ask questions about the "quality control process in their newsrooms."

For a list of all of Shafer's questions, click here and Steele's questions, click here.

Sources: Slate and Poynter Online