CNN needs to slow down after Russia story resignations and retraction Transparency is the new objectivity. The more people understand how the news media work, the more likely they will be to find them credible.

Alicia Shepard | Opinion contributor

Show Caption Hide Caption Three CNN journalists resign over Russian story CNN says a story about the Senate's Russia investigation didn't follow the company's fact-checking procedures. Video provided by Newsy

President Trump woke up Tuesday to news that surely warmed his heart while turning most journalists’ to stone. There was documented evidence backing his otherwise bogus claim that CNN is “fake news.”

CNN accepted the resignations Monday of three highly qualified journalism veterans with star-studded résumés — one a Pulitzer Prize winner, another a Pulitzer finalist. They resigned after the cable news network retracted and deleted a story that said the Senate was investigating Trump ally Anthony Scaramucci and his ties to a Russian investment fund.

CNN said it couldn’t stand behind the story, which might be the most difficult and painful words a news organization ever has to write. The network replaced it with an editor’s note: The piece "did not meet CNN's editorial standards and has been retracted. Links to the story have been disabled."

Music to Trump’s ears, no doubt. At 3:33 a.m., the early morning tweeter typed, “Wow. CNN had to retract big story on 'Russia,' with three employees forced to resign. What about all the other phony stories they do? FAKE NEWS!”

The news was equally uplifting to Breitbart News, whose headline blared “Three employees resign from CNN amid very fake news scandal.” Other right-leaning news outfits will surely seize on the retraction as illustrative of mainstream news media’s anti-Trump bias. (To its credit, Breitbart was first to challenge the CNN report, forcing the retraction.)

CNN needs to do two things: Slow down, and conduct a thorough investigation of how and why this media-damaging mistake happened. Yes, it gives CNN a black eye, but it also hurts thousands of other journalists in big and small towns across the country because it feeds the president ammunition to continue attacking journalists.

The cable network has been in the midst of an impressive hiring spree, expanding its political and investigative teams and garnering much more attention than it did in the pre-Trump days. One gets the feeling that CNN is moving too fast, trying to do too much too quickly, and now is paying the price. (Look at its Comey retraction, the Kathy Griffin debacle and the firing of Iranian-American scholar Reza Aslan.)

CNN has been doing careful, ground-breaking work, but what was the hurry on this Russia-related story? Competition? Sure, but getting it right should always, forgive me, trump getting it first. Scoops shine for a minute, mistakes last forever. Everyone remembers when CNN incorrectly reported on the Supreme Court’s 2012 upholding of Obamacare.

Reports are circulating that red flags flew from CNN’s legal team and standards team, but they were ignored. This was not a “wow, look at this, Martha” story. Why did it have to go online without being properly, thoroughly vetted?

As someone with more than 30 years as an investigative reporter, media critic and former NPR ombudsman, it’s baffling. I know how strictly mainstream news organizations follow internal editorial processes such as fact-checking, double fact-checking, and standards and legal reviews. Especially with sensitive, investigative stories where a) you want to be right and b) you want to be bullet-proof against lawsuits.

Politico reported that Scaramucci called the story’s reporter, Thomas Frank, on Friday and hinted of a potential lawsuit if it wasn’t removed. It was, which speaks volumes.

What’s even more mind-boggling is that the men who resigned are not rookies. CNN editor Eric Lichtblau spent 15 years at The New York Times and won a Pulitzer for national reporting. Thomas Frank is a seasoned former USA TODAY and Newsday reporter and a Pulitzer finalist. Lex Haris joined CNN in 2001 and headed the newly beefed-up investigative unit.

POLICING THE USA: A look at race, justice, media

CNN owes journalists and the public a detailed explanation of what went wrong. There’s a risk for CNN to bare its dirty laundry in public. Trump and his allies will feast on the report. But so what? They already are dining out on the retraction.

The cable network needs to make the report public and recognize that transparency is the new objectivity in this media climate. Transparency fosters credibility. The more people understand how the news media work and what pressure they are up against, the more likely they are to find them credible. And credibility is what journalism needs most, especially now.

Will CNN’s standards editors now do the job of a public editor and report in detail on what happened? Every credible news organization would do well to have a public editor to independently explain what goes on behind the scenes. The only national news organization today with a full-time ombudsman or public editor is NPR.

CNN was smart to dispense with this matter quickly and definitively, including a personal apology to Scaramucci in its editor’s note Friday. "CNN did the right thing. Classy move. Apology accepted. Everyone makes mistakes. Moving on," Scaramucci tweeted next morning.

Speaking of classy. Wouldn’t it be a nice olive branch, a fresh start, if we could attach “Trump tweeted” to sentiments like that?

Alicia Shepard is a veteran media writer and a former ombudsman for NPR. Follow her on Twitter @Ombudsman.

You can read diverse opinions from our Board of Contributors and other writers on the Opinion front page, on Twitter @USATOpinion and in our daily Opinion newsletter. To submit a letter, comment or column, check our submission guidelines.