I just gotta say something else...
I don't write for a paper, nor am I likely to write a book soon. But if I was to do either, I would research my facts to be sure I was right, not because I'm honest, but because if my facts are as wrong as his were, I would expect to loose creditability and my theories would be taken as wrong.
I suppose that if your theories are wrong to start with, why not back them up with untrue "facts"? Most people will not check up on the facts, so this would be effective propaganda...
Not necessarily. I can tell you from personal experience that even the brightest people will avoid applying the same type of rigorous critical thinking they apply on statements they fundamentally disagree with upon those which they do agree with. Even if the facts are totally wrong, they'll say, "well, yes, but the big picture is correct." It's how people like Michael Moore are able to get away with murder.