Most people can't be arsed to find the truth, instead wanting it fed to them. Even if you created a truth institute that had a real psychic that could tell truth from lies, and presented this information to everyone, free, most people STILL wouldn't go out of their way to look at it. In fact, they may even distrust it, thinking that it favors (insert opposing political agenda here).
Until you can change humanity itself, you'll have to deal with and rely on the fact that democracy is basically a contest of showmanship.
I don't know about a psychic, but http://www.politifact.com/ and http://www.factcheck.org/ do a pretty good job.
Until relatively recently, I would have agreed with you. But factcheck recently surrendered to the both-sides-do-it delusion (saying Paul Ryan's plan would repeal Medicare is the lie of the year!), which is as dishonest a claim as anything in the media.
As for people-aren't-experts-they-need-experts-to-understand-complex-policy: sure, that's a theoretical problem. But the primary problem at the moment is that conservatives can claim X when actually I have photographs and that's bullshit. Eg: Mitt Romney's campaign.
I think the answer is two-fold. Create an economic or social (or legal) incentive for journalists not to tell lies. Have a bunch of different, openly accepted, opinions within the one organisation. So the paper has 50 liberals and 50 conservatives. And a fascist. And a communist. And a pacifist, and a warmonger. What's the truth? This guy says this, this girl says that. You're not going to find truth in a monologue. And we have to have a lot less respect for people who are clearly intellectually dishonest; your Australian newspaper op-editors and so on. If you don't make an argument, you don't get published. 800 words of insults loosely strung together is not acceptable.
As a side note: you're also not going to find truth in a he-said-she-said news story. In Australia, new federal government policy is routinely covered as 'opposition leader Tony Abbott disagrees with Gillard's new policy X, saying it will cause the village of Whyalla to explode.' The important part of the story is not the actual policy that will effect people's lives, it's the mindless, unchanging political disagreement between political personalities. Or, perhaps, ALP leadership speculation. That can also be hugely important.
