Yes, the editors should have been more skeptical and waited to get confirmation from at least one other source. The AP did not follow its own rules and made a mistake.

LaPorta did not lie about the source. He got the information from a senior US official. That same source had been vetted by AP editors in the past. It’s not that they did not know who the source was. It’s that they agreed to go with what that one single person said without getting it confirmed by another source.

To quote the article: After further discussion, a second editor said she “would vote” for publishing an alert, adding, “I can’t imagine a U.S. intelligence official would be wrong on this.”

By your paraphrasing the AP editors failed to follow the bureau’s rule on anonymous sourcing because obviously the single source did not provide “so detailed of information there can be no doubt to authenticity.”

The reason LaPorta got canned is because he told his editors the source had been vetted by an AP senior manager. That was true. The source had been vetted by a senior manager for other stories. However, his editors took that to mean a senior manager had approved the sourcing for this story. That had not happened.

I believe the AP does an excellent job much of not most of the time. I’m not railing against its reporting or questioning its credibility overall.

However in this case, I think the organization should take a look at its editorial approval process and not try to throw all the blame on one reporter.