There is an inherent trade-off between being first and being right.

They are not exclusive.

The big problem is what to do when "Be Right" is vague because information is poor and you're dealing with a society where black and white thinking is rampant. Combined with a largely complete lack of understanding of the actual messiness of the scientific method.

It's as easy as saying "X seems like the best bet, because Y, but we need more evidence (which we'll get via Z around time T) to be certain".

The problem is that a good chunk of society views science as it should be infallible and its a failure if its not. And scientists tend to default to "50-50" kinds of language when they're dealing with uncertainty, and tend to overly emphasize uncertainty.

I'd kind of like to see science communicators start talking in the language of sports betting when it comes to uncertainty instead.

There are circles in which credibility and plausibility is more important than honesty - can we assume the CDC is one? (even "being right" is importantly different from "telling the truth")

So... Are those listed in order of importance?

I personally find these principles coming from CDC, against the backdrop of their actions lately, very hypocritical.