[crazygringo]

It's the editor's responsibility to set processes and standards to try to make sure this doesn't happen. If the rules exist but the reporter breaks them, then it's the reporter's fault and they get fired. As happened -- that's part of the process of maintaining standards. It's not the editor's fault. What exactly do you expect them to do? They can't fact-check and verify every single fact and quote in every article. They're not superhuman.

[vintagedave]

Why not? Copy-paste-google would be a sanity check for 99% of them.

[crazygringo]

Because they're busy doing the rest of their job? They don't have enough time for it, nor is it a good use of their time.

That's like asking why the CEO of a 20-person startup isn't reading every line of code for bugs. It's not the best use of their valuable time.

[vintagedave]

It's their responsibility.

It is, therefore, absolutely a good use of their time.

[crazygringo]

That's not how any management position works, which is what an editor is.

You're responsible for verifying that the output looks sane and that processes are good and appear to be followed.

You can't double-check every tiny detail. That's absurd. At some point, you simply have to rely on the word of your employees, and fire them and do damage control if it turns out they're not following procedures but claiming they are.

You seem to be asking for an impossible level of quality control, with the budgets available.