Former ABC reporter Brian Ross appears to have been vindicated.

[Honeycombe8]

34. I don't recall this Brian Ross thing at all. So I looked it up.

He was suspended because at the time, apparently, there was no information source to back up Ross's story. The story was that Trump directed Flynn during the campaign to work out a deal w/the Russian ambassador for something. He was suspended, then months later he and his supervisor left.

So the fact that all or some of the story turned out to be true...not sure if that makes up for not having backup for the story at the time. What I read did not discuss Ross's sources for the information, or whether he admitted a mistake in stating that.

I don't know enough about this, I guess. It sounds sort of like a Dan Rather thing, where he runs with a story before fact checking it properly. But I'd have to know whether he did have a source for that information and that ABC didn't accept the source, or whether he didn't fact check and the source was bad or wrong.

I did see in Wikipedia that he has a distinguished background, BUT he had misreported like this several times before in his career, ending up admitting his mistake. So that probably had something to do with not giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Dan Rather came back after things settled down, although never to the status he had before.

Being in the news business is tricky. That's why it infuriates me that Trump and Trumpers attack those who seek to report real news, with fact checking and accuracy, while Trumper sites are free to write fake stories about fake conspiracies.