"Friday’s newspaper story was accurate ... but it should have clearly said the previous day’s story was wrong ,,,"

No kidding.  In the Globe's "rush to judgement" approach on the "unfounded series, errors began at the investigation stage. The stories contained more.  Request to the watchdog: follow up on this series.  There are many more "lessons to be learned."

It was a valid--and intriguing--concept gone wrong.  I suspect there were two initial errors made at the very beginning: 
1. The young lead investigator needed far more editorial oversight. I think she'll be a great journalist in a few years time...but not mature enough yet.  Many of us are blessed--we made big mistakes and can keep them private.  Unfortunately, her work is public.

2. The editors should have assigned an older male journalist as a "partner"--sure, give her the by-line, but have him play Devil's Advocate every step of the way.  It would have avoided the "pro-feminist" bias some readers complained about.