On September 8, 2006 a Miami Herald reporter named Oscar Corral wrote an article about several south Florida journalists that were moonlighting at Radio Martí and TV Martí (two U.S. government sponsored information outlets that target Cuba like the Voice of America targeted eastern Europe during the cold war). Some of the journalists named in the article were Corral's colleagues at the Miami Herald Media Company, they worked for the Spanish language sister of the paper, El Nuevo Herald. Those journalists were fired as a result.
The Herald justified the firings by claiming that such moonlighting violated journalistic ethics. An excerpt from the Corral article:
Journalism ethics experts called the payments a fundamental conflict of interest. Such violations undermine the credibility of reporters to objectively cover key issues affecting U.S. policy toward Cuba, they said.
The episode was embarrassing for the Herald because it turns out that at least one of the fired journalists had obtained permission to do the moonlighting work from a previous editor and another one of the fired journalists had been featured in a Herald article several years earlier that mentioned the fact that she contributed to Radio and TV Martí.
The point is that the Herald went to great lengths to cleanse itself of perceived ethics violations by some of its employees. The sin the journalists committed was to be on the U.S. government payroll.
If we take the Herald's pronouncements from that time seriously then what are we to make of Herald.com posting entire items from a Cuban government information agency as if it were coming from a legitimate independent news organization like Reuters or the Associated Press?
Is the Herald actually telling us between the lines that the U.S. government can't be trusted but the Cuban government can?
The Miami Herald was listed as number 3 on Time Magazine's list of The 10 Most Endangered Newspapers in America. I can't imagine why.