I mentioned the book "Why Learn History When It is Already on Your Phone?" by Sam Wineberg. It is true that the presence and power of Google Search, Bing search and Duckduckgo search makes finding material on a given topic fast, easy and local. If you are connected to the internet, you can find articles on just about anything very quickly.
One of several answers to Wineberg's question relates to sources. There are many references today to fake news: reports from manipulators, ignoramuses and mis-understandings. You can look up the history of the Taft-Hartley act. Maybe you find a report that it was passed by the Missouri state legislature in 1775. I hope not, because it wasn't. Missouri didn't even become a state until 1821. Another problem with sources, on the internet or not, is obsolescence. Maybe it was thought that the first flight of an airplane was in 1910 but now we know it was in 1903. Scholarship, research, personal revelation can change what is known.
"What is known?" implies to anyone or to everyone. It can be a useful habit to ask "What is known BY WHOM?" What I accept as true and correct is often not what you accept as true and correct. You realize that I am prejudiced and you don't accept my account of the facts, of what happened, to whom, where, why and when. Trying to get a solid account of a story, a history, a scientific experiment, one that can stand up to critical scrutiny and probing questions by others, both typical people and specialized experts is exactly the work performed by doctoral students and professors.
We humans work and work to get the facts straight. We try to develop a usable narrative that includes all the relevant facts, a useful weaving together of the facts and no falsehoods or errors. It is an ongoing project.
