Well, some seem to be trying to say that it was just a little minor boo-boo by the reporter, and therefore the reporter should bear no major consequences.
Meanwhile, has anyone with credibility established that there is a “rape culture” at the University of Virginia?
The school can’t sue. You can’t legally defame government institutions.
You keep implying that what happened was just a teensy little oopsie – certainly not worth firing someone over.
I’m curious–if the kind of gross incompetence, laziness and probable malfeasance that the reporter and her editors showed by not doing even the most bottom-level fact-checks isn’t grounds for firing in your book, what is?
It’s worth firing someone when he or she is no longer worth employing. “Grounds for firing” doesn’t really mean much.
What…??
Ah right…forgot. Thanks.
As an aside I think schools should be exempt from that since they are a different creature. I mean, you can defame the courts but you are still stuck with them like it or not. Same with Congress or the FBI and so on.
But you can choose a school and if a school gets a bad rep it hurts the institution in a real and tangible way.
A discussion for another time perhaps.
In the United States, there is no cause of action for defamation when the plaintiff is the government, which includes public universities.
I am just dropping in for a couple of points - as a member of the media who had to cover this mess from beginning to now I must say it cannot be understated how much money and time this goose chase cost everyone involved; investigations, reactions, legal work, insane hours by other organizations trying to track down the truth - this article cost a lot of people a mint of money and time.
Second, as to the idea that releasing the Columbia Report on Sunday Night was an attempt to bury it; no, it’s actually the most damaging time. It allows the major media players plenty of time to research, plan and react to the report starting full bore Monday morning. It’s hard to gear up to a big news event, it’s not like there are hundreds of reporters hanging out in newsrooms like firefighters waiting for the bell to ring. By announcing a couple weeks in advance the report would be release 9pm Sunday evening Columbia allowed the media outlets to acquire, digest, plan and fully respond to the report to the fullest of their ability on the Monday morning news cycle.
Stories are buried at 5pm Friday afternoon.
Right. But that was the least of the failings of Rolling Stone’s journalism.
I did no such thing. I’m saying that not all mistakes, even very serious ones, are necessarily a reason to fire someone, especially when these erroneous decisions had to be approved of on an institutional level.
I’m saying that when a publication has participated in and approved of decisions that were wrong then the publication owes the reporter cover, because it’s the publication that is at fault, not the reporter—if Rolling Stone knew all the things in the CJR report before going to press.
At this point I have to believe that no one is actually reading the content of my posts and is instead offering knee-jerk reactions to my opposition to the position that the only proper reaction to this incident is to fire somebody.
I think you are missing an important distinction.
There are mistakes and there is professional negligence. This is not some just out of school, wet behind the ears reporter. Erdely is a seasoned reporter who ought to know the ropes and should be held accountable.
In this reporter’s case there is abundant evidence of going for the sensational story. There was almost no attempt at due diligence by the reporter or the magazine. They had an explosive story and willfully disregarded anything that would diminish its impact. And for a little time it worked.
That is why the people involved deserve the most severe censure including being fired. Were it not for some diligent reporter from the Washington Post this would have slid by and the people involved would be praised for their awesome article that smashed the reputation of a fraternity house and a university. More, they would be encouraged to repeat this travesty.
The bottom line is this was not a “mistake” that anyone could make. It was willful. I do not believe Erdely is dumb or unaware of journalistic ethics. I think she is an intelligent person. Unfortunately for her, in this case, that is a liability because she can’t retreat to being ignorant as a defense.
Possible THIRD rape story with portions fabricated by Erdely. This is a right-wing website so don’t just trust it blindly, but it raises the issue.
http://www.redstate.com/2015/04/07/sabrina-rubin-erdelys-possibly-fake-rape-story/
If Erdley were an employee of RS, I could understand the decision to not fire her, although I would probably disagree with it. As an independent contractor, it is hard to understand their willingness to do business with her in the future.
Thanks for sharing the info.
Personally, I think it’s been money well spent. I’ve been very disappointed recently (years actually) in how most media outlets have been reporting the news. If this Rolling Stone debacle makes most (I’ll settle for many) media outlets to reconsider their enforcement, or lack there of, of their fact-checking policy, and to actually vet the cut-and-paste articles that have become so popular (and cost effective), I would consider that to be a positive outcome.
Sabrina Erdely should be fired from her position as a journalist because she is a terrible journalist.
Won’t disagree, but *damn *I hate driving that Rt 29 down to Charlottesville and back. Fucking painful.
We’ll be doing a lot more of it in a few months when this fucker goes on trial- UVA’s very own (likely) serial killer.
Already spent a bunch of weeks there for another murder trial. Pretty damn tired of UVA frankly.
They’ve got whiskey, women, music, and smoke. It’s where all the reporter folk go for a double-truck and a folo. (Did I get the slang right? 
)
I thought Graham/Matthew’s case seem pretty open-and-shut, but the public will want to hear the gory details. That’s gotta be rough.
Having read about her past articles, Erdeley is apparently a much sloppier journalist than I thought. Seems like she’s pretty much a one-trick pony; she wants to write articles about how rape is systemic everywhere and the authorities are ignoring it, she goes out to look for someone with a story that fits into that narrative, and she presents that story uncritically and without looking for any facts that might poke a hole in it.
I hope she realizes at this point that this kind of shoddy reporting only hurts the cause she’s trying to advance by making more rape victims look like liars who are only out for attention.