Yes, quality control caught it, but the point of the article was that the guy was barely disciplined at all -- looks like law enforcement and the D.A.'s office not operating with the proper checks and balances: makes the next guy just be more careful to cover his tracks.
But keep in mind, the article cherry-picked a case from law enforcement. The author makes note of a single case. A case that speaks eloquently to the point the author wishes to make.
The flip side is that there are many, many well-known cases of media fraud, which the author chooses not to mention. And cases of media fraud win prizes. Duranty wona Pulitizer. Cooke won a Pulitzer. Rather won a Peabody.
More discipline for lab fraud? I'm all for it. Fewer prizes for media fraud? It's not even suggested in this article.