Radiolab did a story on this, and the lack of critical thinking on their part was somewhat of a turning point. I realized that many of their stories were just a chaotic collection of impulsive ideas, rather than anything that was organized with context or presented with responsibility and wisdom.
Apparently it had the same effect on a lot of listeners, because they did a short followup where they said they did nothing wrong, and refused to acknowledge any responsibility for effectively making an advertisement for a business that was likely to harm people.
It actually stood in stark contrast to This American Life. They made some smaller mistake, and the next week they spent the entire hour identifying all the things that lead up to the error, and going into excruciating detail about why they believed their mistake was even an more serious one than most listeners realized.
I don’t listen to many podcasts anymore, but I thought the two responses taught me a lot about journalistic ethics, and how to identify when to continue reading or watching. Is this news source casual about getting details wrong? Do their individual stories fit in context of a larger story they are telling about the world over many years? Are they careful about what reporting will lead to a rush to judgement or bad decisions by readers and viewers?