I think you should read Pellegrin's answer and the site rebuttal.
I am firmly with Pellegrin on this, and I think that it was the site's behaviour to be quite unethical.
In accusing a photographer of a grave violation of certain integrity duties they do not exercise "critics" in the way a let's say motion picture critic does. There was some kind of "investigation" work which was not honestly conducted and which resulted in a lot of bullshit launched over a photographer through a fan.
Their rebuttal is so ridiculous I don't even discuss it if not to say that it shows their low moral standard. They could have just said "sorry" and it would have been excusable. Climbing on mirrors never helps re-establishing a reputation of a site.
In a reportage there always are portraits, reconstructions etc. which is perfectly fine when the images are honestly described. The publishing industry being a "cottage system industry" it may happen that the wrong caption goes with the picture. Pellegrin describes how the caption written by the photographer is separate from the "background information" that agencies distribute with the picture. The site goes on with their ridiculous accusations of having "lifted" text from other sources. Bleah.