Discussion for article #235067
I would agree that Rolling Stone had an obligation and instead went for sensationalism.
4 Likes
Or laissez faire.
Unfortunately, we live in an era of Yellow Journalism instead of responsible journalism, so we are suffering from a lot of really bad stories done for sensationalism.
2 Likes
Time to put Erdely under the spotlight. Unfortunately, the RWNJ media will use this to smear “the liberal, left-wing press” that they accuse of going after their own stalwarts like Faux and Breitbart.
Exactly. The story here is shoddy journalism not the veracity of the source.
2 Likes
Rolling Stone would have been fine if they had just gone with listicles instead. About kittens. Would have had 100 times more hits.
Rolling Stone bears the primary blame. But “Jackie” made a bunch of crap up. Dis she suffer some kind of sexual assault? Who knows–she’s not credible unless you want to advance the argument that lying extravagently is de facto a symptom of trauma, in which case all lying is excused. The woman started lying and kept lying and then vanished when the lies were going to be exposed. She smeared a bunch of people. Acknowledging that does not diminish the reality of sexual assault one bit, except to the degree that “Jackie’s” acts made it much harder for other victims. Jackie is also to blame
1 Like