Yes that claim is wrong, here's CNN admitting they ran a story that was totally false and aren't going to do anything about it, because it met their standard of

Yes that claim is wrong, here's CNN admitting they ran a story that was totally false and aren't going to do anything about it, because it met their standard of two sources: https://theintercept.com/2017/12/09/the-u-s-media-yesterday-suffered-its-most-humiliating-debacle-in-ages-now-refuses-all-transparency-over-what-happened/ https://theintercept.com/2017/12/09/the-u-s-media-yesterday-... Raju went on CNN, in muted tones, to note the correction, explicitly claiming that “two sources” had each given him the false date on the email, while also making clear that CNN did not ever even see the email, but only had sources describe its purported contents. As Greenwald points out, in this particular case it's implausible that those two sources could have been independent because the mistake was about mis-reading the date on an email in a way that happened to be politically convenient: All of this prompts the glaring, obvious, and critical question — one that CNN refuses to address: How did “multiple sources” all misread the date on this document, in exactly the same way and toward the same end, and then feed this false information to CNN? So either the OP is wrong about what credible news organisations do, or CNN is not credible (see my arguments below to that end), or both. I wonder how much of the commentary about NYT/CNN/etc being "credible" and Breitbart being "not credible" is based on misunderstandings of how journalism works?