The New York Times has run an editorial apologizing for its coverage of Iraq's terrorist connections and WMD programs.
It doesn't repair any damage done, but it's an outward gesture acknowledging a problem. After many of their legitimacy problems this year, they're trying to regain their status as "the newspaper of record." If the record has flaws, it must be corrected. The NYT has accepted responsibility for its actions and is trying to rectify the problem.
Eventually, they must return to what newspapers do best. They must tell the complete story rather than a single-source breaking headline. News stories based on a single source are difficult to defend.
Even at my college paper, we required five sources per story. If nothing else, it rounds out the story and fills in informational gaps. Yes, some reporters complained when the story was about the new parking sticker design, but four of our readers got to publicly voice their views.
This is how newspapers in democratic countries should work. News is about those trying to control the flood, and those affected by the flood. It's also about how much it cost to hire people to control the flood and how to stop future flooding, etc...
Enough for now,