This was recently posted, in a longer ver­sion, on a list­serv. Any ideas:

This year, we have seen a pre­cip­i­tous decline in our accu­racy  stan­dards. Hardly a day goes by with­out a cor­rec­tion or three.

Part of it, I think, is that it’s never been eas­ier for read­ers and  sources to point out our mis­takes. I think other fac­tors include  edi­tors who are too busy mul­ti­task­ing to really think crit­i­cally  dur­ing the edit­ing process, writ­ers who are dis­en­gaged, sto­ries that come in too close to dead­line for good vet­ting and poten­tially, a process with so many fail-safes that no one takes ownership.

Here is what we are already doing:

–Reporters are required to put CQs in their sto­ries that list of the  source of info on each fact.

–Every story is edited by three line edi­tors, then two copy editors .

–Pages are checked by top edi­tors and copy editors.

–When mis­takes are made, edi­tors are required to fill out a form explain­ing the mis­take and why/how it happened.

–I’ve dis­trib­uted lists of my best prac­tices for get­ting things right.

–I spon­sored an accu­racy con­test called Good Save! to cre­ate a cul­ture  that cel­e­brates find­ing and fix­ing mis­takes before they hit the paper.

–I’ve done mul­ti­ple enrich­ments on accuracy.

–We’ve talked about tak­ing own­er­ship of your own work.