If a rumor is untrue but the FT prints it, is it still a rumor?

From an FT story on the DoJ investigation of CDS pricing:

In recent weeks, for example, rumours have circulated that last year some large dealers manipulated the price of derivatives linked to mortgages and corporate bonds – by “leaning on” prices, to use trading jargon – to hurt rival banks or hedge fund groups.

“Some of the stuff that has been happening on the trading desks has been pretty dirty,” says one banker who used to hold a senior position at a large dealer.

There is little evidence that those tales are grounded in truth, or directly linked to the current probe by the DoJ.

If the rumors aren't true, then why print one? Especially one about "stuff" happening on unspecified "trading desks"? Rumors on Wall Street are rarely true.

I'm less and less impressed with Gillian Tett.