Whether the story reflects the facts is obviously a different matter.
The really tough thing would have been to decide to take Woodward and Bernstein off the story. They were carrying the coal for us - in that their stories were right.
You check off stories to make sure if they're true or if they're right.
As a print journalist, if you hear a rumour you try to stand it up and if you can't, the story dies. With a blog you can throw the rumour out there and ask for help. You can say: 'We don't know if this is true or not.'
If you're a reporter, the easiest thing in the world is to get a story. The hardest thing is to verify. The old sins were about getting something wrong, that was a cardinal sin. The new sin is to be boring.
There have been many times when we have not run stories because we cannot get it verified.
It would be absurd for me or any other editor to review the authenticity or accuracy of stories that are nominated for prizes.
