This entirely reminds me of the Manti Te’o incident. Too much trust was placed in one source. Hardly anything was confirmed with others. As the report said, reaching out to those three friends would have been critical. I think the first step in preventing an error like this comes before reporting even starts. When dealing with a topic like this, I think reporters need to question all the reasons it could be untrue. Could someone be lying? What would be someone’s motives to lie? Is it reasonable to think these events could take place? That at least opens a reporter’s mind to why this could be false and that would lead to more thorough reporting. A long time ago I saw the quote, “To believe with certainty we must begin with doubting.” And to me, that can be applied to journalism.
In the case of Jackie, her tentativeness to disclose details and names should have been a huge red flag. In the report it said that the writer was bothered by the fact that Jackie wouldn’t name the lifeguard. I think that goes back to needing to trust your instincts. If something doesn’t feel right, it might not be. When Jackie was hard to get a hold of, the reporter should have questioned what this might be stemming from. Ultimately, I feel like the writer let the source be in control of the story, and that was detrimental.