In the haste of scoop journalism a serious mistake was made that will likely be detrimental to Hillary Clinton’s campaign for its entire length. The New York Times wanted to get out a story that would draw in readers and in doing so, inaccurately described a situation that didn’t specifically involve only Hillary Clinton. However, the Times made the grave mistake of wanting things done quickly rather than done well.

The first mistake that the Times made was trusting an anonymous source. While in some cases an anonymous source may be necessary or understandable to use in situations where a person may be in danger, this particular instance didn’t exactly make sense. On top of that, there is usually some sort of way to ensure confidentiality between the journalist and the source so that the journalist can be sure that the source is trustworthy without putting the source at risk. But it was a very amateur move to trust an anonymous source without knowing his/her credentials or to have someone else also verify the story they were telling.

Another mistake the Times made was using language that was more eye-capturing than it was accurate. Although at first they did think there was reason to believe it was a “criminal” referral, they should have taken more time to know for sure whether that was the case. Especially in the instances of high profile people such as Hillary Clinton, accusing someone of this stature of criminal activity can do a lot to hurt them and there is usually very little they can do to turn it back around. Once you stick a label as negatively connoted as “criminal” on a person, there is little you can do to take it back.

A third mistake made by the Times was not retracting the headline sooner and not making it known that they did change the headline from “criminal” to “security” referral sooner. This would have called many more people’s attention to the fact and could have at least slowed some people in their judgment of Hillary Clinton and her actions.