It may seem extremely obvious, but I think that the situation could have easily been avoided if the Times had avoided the usage of anonymous sources. As stated in Sulivan’s opinion piece regarding this issue, anonymous sources inherently lack accountability regarding their accuracy. If the Times wants to maintain their reputation as a accurate source of news they must take care to examine their sources and make sure that the facts are accurate. Although it may be tempting to be the first organization to report a story, the competitiveness must be balanced with care for accuracy. Some customers have lost their trust in the Times as a result of this issue and are even demanding refunds.

I think that the Times is generally doing a great job but to make sure that this kind of issue doesn’t happen again, they should implement a system of checks where the editor might question the reporter about the facts presented in the story. In addition, they should make sure that the facts can be verified independently via a second source.