I clicked on a story and at the bottom, it lists "sources" (19 in this case). Following one of these sources (a lesser-known site), there is an article, and at the end it says "REUTERS". So, I guess its source was another source.
Maybe a site like this should try to root-out the "root source" of information - official press releases or press conferences, eye-witness accounts.
I think some editorializing is worthwhile to place things in context and to decide what information to put together into a readable article, but things could be more explicit and should always link to the source material.
replies(3):