Come on, this is just being dishonest.
If I said on national television, "Apparently Orange Joe eats babies." or something, of course that would be awful for you. Corrections/retractions rarely ever have the effect of nullifying the effect of the initial statement.
I don't know why this is even a contentious subject. It would be a shitty thing to happen to anyone, I don't know how that's even up for debate.
You have this idea that "The Truth™" is marked out in all-caps and easily identifiable. Reporters can only ever report the best information they have available, and the usual standard is two corroborating sources at a minimum, or direct quotation. So two different sources saying "I think the shooter's name is X" independently, or a quote from, say, the Chief of Police or a lead investigator saying "we think his name is X", though the latter would be reported as "Chief of Police/lead investigator says".
If they went off because of one random Tweet by a nobody and plastered a name all over, then sure, that was unethical and they'll probably get administrative penalties or even (likely) fired. If they had confirmed sources and the sources were wrong, though? The journalist is 100% in the clear.
you are not stopping propaganda. humans are the most easily manipulated species on the planet. propaganda fuels the manipulation.
This thread got way off topic. This is a suggestion forum, not a discussion forum.
To respond to the initial suggestion: if you feel someone is on this site for nefarious reasons, just use the report function, and leave your reason for reporting in the report window. It's that simple. It doesn't matter what the exact reason is for reporting someone, just report it and we will look into it.
If you feel that after doing that there's still a problem, feel free to take the issue up with a blue (Global) moderator and we can explain more in depth, most likely.
Closing this here, after this got derailed.
CLOSED.