Bloomberg here will blame its source and take no responsibility.
All business are "in the business of making money", that's what being a business is. What sets them apart is how they make it. In the case of media companies is, precisely, by getting the story right. A publisher that doesn't is more likely to lose influence and readership as time goes by. For a publication like Bloomberg, more so.
So yeah, they do care. That doesn't mean they don't fall for scams or bad reporting. They do, but it's in their best interest not to do so. In this case, I'm sure Bloomberg is already frantically calling all the reporter sources. They should have done it before the piece was published, sure, and they'll sure blame the reporter and the sources, but I think it's disingenuous to think they just shrug these things off.
Ideally yes, but nowdays it seems to be rather; by getting the story framed exactly as their corporate owner wants them to frame it.
Yes, they'll slowly loose credibility and in fact that is happening, but the process takes decades and is not likely to affect current reporters, if they lied in service of the status quo.
Strongly disagree. Media companies make money by publishing stories that people want to hear about.
Almost any article about Russia is a counter example to this.
Overall Bloomberg as a company does not sustain itself on news revenue.