I once considered “60 Minutes” to be the Cadillac of TV news shows.

It might be becoming the Edsel.

Lara Logan, one of the CBS network’s correspondents for “60 Minutes” apologized this morning for a news report that cast a damning light on the Obama administration’s handling of the Benghazi, Libya terrorist attack on Sept. 11, 2012 that left four people dead, including the U.S. ambassador to Libya, Christopher Stevens.

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/53498378/ns/us_news-the_new_york_times/

Seems that Logan’s sourcing was a bit questionable. The guy she attributed for much of the information, security contractor Dylan Davies, had given the FBI information that had contradicted what he told Logan’s staff in preparation for the broadcast.

Davies told Logan he was there during the attack; he told the FBI he didn’t get there until the next morning. So … did he see anything or didn’t he?

The attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi remains one of the more tragic episodes in U.S. diplomatic history. It was confusing, chaotic and fiery. That’s what happens in fire fights. Don’t they say often that “truth often is the first casualty” in these incidents?

This isn’t the first time “60 Minutes” has gotten its backside in a sling. In 2004, CBS correspondent Dan Rather broadcast a now-discredited report that alleged George W. Bush pulled too many strings to get himself signed up with an Air National Guard unit and then didn’t fulfill his obligation. Rather essentially lost his job over the shoddy reporting.

“60 Minutes” is scheduled to go on the air Sunday with a full apology and what’s known in the trade as “correction.” It likely won’t retract the story. The correction, though, is necessary if the news show seeks to return to its Cadillac status.