File under...well, you know where to file it.
Crash.
The report, published by the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism and commissioned by Rolling Stone, said the magazine failed to engage in "basic, even routine journalistic practice"
| ...the irony that the New York Times is reporting this is thick, thick, thick... |
| Who now should be named as she is not a rape victim and is (very likely) the perpetrator of a hoax. |
| Who is herself no stranger to questionable journalism; check out her history. |
On Sunday, Ms. Erdely, in her first extensive comments since the article was cast into doubt, apologized to Rolling Stone's readers, her colleagues and "any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article."
| She didn't apologize to the frat house. Guess the lawyers managed to muzzle her on that one. |
In an interview discussing Columbia's findings, Jann S. Wenner, the publisher of Rolling Stone, acknowledged the piece's flaws but said that it represented an isolated and unusual episode and that Ms. Erdely would continue to write for the magazine. The problems with the article started with its source, Mr. Wenner said. He described her as "a really expert fabulist storyteller" who managed to manipulate the magazine's journalism process. When asked to clarify, he said that he was not trying to blame Jackie, "but obviously there is something here that is untruthful, and something sits at her doorstep."
Wreckage.
The Columbia report cataloged a series of errors at Rolling Stone, finding that the magazine could have avoided trouble with the article if certain basic "reporting pathways" had been followed. Written by Steve Coll, the Columbia journalism school's dean; Sheila Coronel, the dean of academic affairs; and Derek Kravitz, a postgraduate research scholar at the university, the report, at nearly 13,000 words, is longer than the 9,000-word article, "A Rape on Campus."
No survivors.
After its publication last November, the article stoked a national conversation about sexual assault on college campuses and roiled the university.
No insurance.
The police in Charlottesville, Va., said last month they had "exhausted all investigative leads" and found "no substantive basis" to support the article's depiction of the assault. Jackie did not cooperate with the police and declined to be interviewed for the Columbia report. She also declined, through her lawyer, Palma Pustilnik, to be interviewed for this article. She is no longer in touch with some of the advocates who first brought her to the attention of Rolling Stone, said Emily Renda, a rape survivor working on sexual assault issues at the University of Virginia.
Any further attempts at "investigative" reporting by Rolling Stone can be dismissed, even if they come with pictures and signed confessions.
Mr. Wenner said Will Dana, the magazine's managing editor, and the editor of the article, Sean Woods, would keep their jobs.
Good thing, since they wouldn't be able to find jobs anyplace reputable.
In an interview, Mr. Dana said he had reached many of the same conclusions as the Columbia report in his own efforts to examine the article, but he disagreed with the report's assertion that the magazine had staked its reputation on the word of one source. "I think if you take a step back, our reputation rests on a lot more than this one story," he said.
They'd have to settle for writing for some rag like the New York Times.