There's a difference between "things that can be proven in a court of law" and "things that are generally considered true."
For the former, some shop owner has to risk his life testifying, or the cops have to have recordings. A newspaper does not and cannot hold to this standard.
Which is why I included persecute, which is what people do in many cases online. I think it's good practice to not persecute others until you have sufficient evidence.
That can mean not making judgement based on things which are generally true in cases where it can damage another's reputation or result in the internet mob descending on them.
How much proof would you be able to find for that? Do you insist an owner speak on the record? "Photographs or it didn't happen"?
So you ask for evidence, and attempt to correlate it.