The Rolling Stone magazine has retracted the University of Virginia rape story that we have previously discussed. While agreeing with a Columbia Journalism School review of major flaws in reporting and editing, the publication has refused to fire anyone. The writer, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, will continue to write for the publication despite quotations from an editor that she was repeatedly asked to confirm the story with key witnesses who were never interviewed. The review concluded that the failure “may have spread the idea that many women invent rape allegations.”
Published Jann Wenner has decided that no one will be fired for the notorious story. The alleged victim, Jackie, has reportedly refused to cooperate with either the police investigation or Columbia’s investigation. The police found no evidence to support the rape charge. Her lawyer told Columbia that it is “in her best interest to remain silent at this time.”
What is striking is disconnect between the findings and the ultimate response of the newspapers. In addition to the shocking failures of Erdely to interview key witnesses, Sean Woods, the primary editor, was found as lacking in not doing enough to press Erdely to “close the gaps in her reporting.” Likewise, Will Dana, the magazine’s top editor, “might have looked more deeply into the story drafts he read, spotted the reporting gaps and insisted that they be fixed. He did not.” Notably, Woods has insisted he did push: “I did repeatedly ask, ‘Can we reach these people? Can we?’ And I was told no.” Yet, Erdely will continue to write for the magazine?
There is a lawsuit against Rolling Stone Magazine that hopefully will impose a more concrete penalty for the negligence in this controversy.
Notably, Teresa Sullivan, the president of UVA, issued a statement Sunday evening that described the magazine’s story as “irresponsible,.” Yet, the university was equally quick to condemn those referenced in the story — a response that confirmed long-standing concerns of academics over the stripping of due process rights of those accused on college campuses of such misconduct. While both the university and the magazine raised the fear that this story has reinforced the view that some people fake rape claims (which is clearly a legitimate concern), there is relatively little discussion of the rights of those implicated in the story. That may be the focus of the resulting litigation.
As discussed by the Washington Post, the wholesale failures and bias shown in this publication was truly shocking. However, the response will only magnify that shock and reinforce the view that litigation is badly needed in this case as it was in the Duke case.
Source: CNN
There are very few credible examples of pure journalism left in our country anymore. This is somewhat true of both sides of the aisle. Virtually every news outlet has a bias… especially on the Internet.
Almost no one reports straight facts anymore. There is always a bias, a slant, a manipulation, or an intentional omission to promote an agenda.
Every day it gets harder and harder for an average American to keep themselves accurately informed.
Not that I’ve ever in my life read more than two or three stories from Rolling Stone, what they did to the University of Virginia is inexcusable. Were their publication the only source, the damage may have been minimal due to their minuscule readership base, but their erroneous story was picked up and parroted by every mainstream media outlet… with them quoting Rolling Stone as the source… and providing themselves cover while perpetuating what was a total fallacy!
And like we see in more and more situations anymore… there is zero accountability for those responsible.
USN420 – I find subscribing to the British newspapers gives me better coverage of the United States than either the AP or Reuters.
Rolling Stone mag has gone mainstream. They don’t fire anybody there either.
Getting away with what the Rolling Stone editor and reporter got away with is not peculiar to ‘leftist rags’. Sliming, slurring, and slashing without being held accountable are common practices in the right wing media. Rush Limburger makes the Rolling Stone look good; not that the Rolling Stone has any integrity in this, but to quote another person that comments here, ‘just sayin’.
The Rolling Stone incident is only the tip of the ‘rape culture’ culture iceberg.
Every person knows that leftist organizations such as Rolling Stone, The New York Times, MSNBC and academia propagate leftist doctrine and propaganda which is insinuated into their generic product. Occasionally they are caught “red-handed.” This is one of those occasions.
There is no plausible deniability that everyone knows these are all radical leftist adjuncts with the same collectivist agenda.
There was a reason the Founders established a “restricted-vote republic” – Ben Franklin, “…a republic, if you can keep it.” Capable, successful and patriotic voters who met criteria were to direct America; voters who could discern the facts and the truth, and put the nation on the right path – the path set and defined in the Preamble. That path is government limited to security and infrastructure, with the “blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity” (not to the government) as freedom and free enterprise without governmental interference.
@NickS
The problem with disinformation is that the erroneous stuff has a longer shelf life than the corrections. I doubt the retraction will be remembered as well as the sensational story. Not to mention the denialists who will invent some excuse to cover their idiotic acceptance of the original story, such as “but her heart was in the right place!”
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
The worst that’s happened here is that women that were attacked like this “story” proposes, is that now maybe there will be more of a burden of proof on them.
Telling the truth and reporting a rape to police officials immediately after it happened are not undue hardships or burdens placed on a victim.
“The internet is the great equalizer.” And that’s why Free Press got FCC to violate the Separation of Powers to take control of the Internet. To get rid of the great equalizer.
And, w/ a few exceptions, the reporters I’ve dealt w/ were all a-holes.
I’ve said this previously. And anyone here ever involved in a case reported in the press will say the same. I have been involved w/ many cases that were reported on by print and TV. They ALWAYS get BASIC facts wrong. It’s usually not agenda driven like this, just utter incompetence. They teach ideology in universities now, not how to be a freakin’ reporter.
Between our govt. shredding the Constitution, and the press being corrupt, incompetent and elitist, we are heading down a dangerous path. The internet is the great equalizer. But, the MSM has always been hypocritical, attacking people and institutions cavalierly, and never holding themselves accountable. The internet just exposes their hypocrisy more now.
The worst that’s happened here is that women that were attacked like this “story” proposes, is that now maybe there will be more of a burden of proof on them.
Screw the Rolling Stones! They are on tour soon. But the real story should be this dumb TV screen put up in the left field over the stands at Wrigley. This is a story of sacriledge. Or however ya spull it.
I am both surprised and not surprised at the non-action in this whole thing. When this first came up I recalled that during my graduate school research class that we were to depend on Rolling Stone only for the reviews. Things have not changed.
A ‘real newspaper’ would fire everyone involved.
It is best to read the US press as if one were reading PRAVDA.
You can still learn some facts about what is happening nationally, but one must assume that most of these stories are merely ‘space alien’ stories to promote a liberal moral panic, or they are straight agitprop.
https://rachelmarsdenwords.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/agitprop-china.jpg
Speaking of no one being fired….
In a related story, two female librarians admitted to lying about a male librarian being a “sexual predator.” A third librarian has not yet admitted her role in destroying the man’s career, and it was destroyed. The debacle has been called “TeamHarpy.”
The third librarian, who has not yet admitted destroying the man’s career, is the American Library Association’s top expert claiming library filters do not work. They work really well nowadays, by the way. If public libraries do not filter out porn and child porn, it is likely because this third TeamHarpy liar is THE leading expert ALA uses to convince communities not to use Internet filters despite the law.
“Jackie” sure did a lot of damage, but third Team Harpy member “The Librarian in Black” is a leading reason porn and child porn is in public libraries nationwide despite the law. Way more people nationwide are being harmed as a direct result.
Naturally, media does not cover that story since the American Library Association consists of angelic librarians who wouldn’t hurt a fly. “One of the other things that libraries have is that people really trust us a lot and sometimes I, I stay up late at night thinking how I can exploit that. I haven’t done it yet but I’m thinking it in my head.” Who said that? The Librarian in Black, 12/18/2013.
Fake, but accurate.
We are back to the liberal standard where intentions count for more than deeds.
Ms. Erdely violated journalistic standards, she caused an immense amount of mischief for both men and for male fraternities, and she debased Rolling Stone magazine.
But her heart was pure, so all is forgiven.
I guess Rolling Stone has gone the way of the rags at the checkout counter. It’s the publicity, not ethics or the truth. Money talks, integrity takes a hike.
I am interested in the girl that alleged being raped. Will she face charges? It seems that concerning the extremely serious issue of rape on campus or rape period, false accusations would garner some serious judicial attention.
QUOTE “What is striking is disconnect between the findings and the ultimate response of the newspapers.”
I have filed FOIA requests before, so I already knew just how bad it can be in the news media.
The ironic part is one of the articles actually won an award for a “unbiased” article….REALLY sad!