Unfortunately when it comes to reputation, you're only as good as your worst offenses portray you. It's very hard to make the argument that "most of it is good, so there isn't a problem."

A scientific journal doesn't say "hey - we only occasionally let through a few articles without peer review; the majority of our content is peer reviewed, so we're ok."

Even the most "trustworthy" US-based news organizations have lost a lot of credibility in the past couple of weeks. And yes, there have even been a fair number of cases of deliberate and calculated lying - all without corrections or retractions.

Or, you know, keep trusting these companies (not knowing which stories are "mistakes" vs truth). I'm not going to stop anyone from trusting a source of information just because I don't trust it myself.

Still, the point of my original comment is more about how we deal with it in social media. I have no problem letting the market decide what to do with media organizations.