If this would have been a story about rape at RISD or Evergreen State College, the writer would have been sent back to double, triple and quadruple check, interview every student and faculty member on campus, and even if it would have been found to be true, the piece never would have seen the light of day. A very moneyed fraternity at a very moneyed school, however, is already considered guilty of every crime possible by RS just because they exist.

As for the writer, she either didn't have enough self respect or respect for her employer to research this story properly, or DID research it (i.e. finding out there was no one with that name in the fraternity) and knew she could make her bones on it and didn't care who was destroyed in the process.

The rape crisis is completely manufactured. Those who are guilty of doing so don't want to empower women, they want to put them into an eternal victim state so they can be more easily indoctrinated.

This.

Rape is a heinous crime that has existed for all of human history, and thank goodness for feminism, because things used to be horrific for rape victims. We've come a long way since then. But the extremists who have hijacked feminism won't, can't acknowledge that, or acknowledge that there are unintended negative consequences that come along with freedom and empowerment. Hence the manufactured crisis. One only need look at their new preferred "solution" to see the factual logic that proves it is manufactured.

But nothing prevents a journalist from reporting this effect of privacy laws rather than leaving readers to assume that silence on the part of a university = confirmation. Good journalism would include in a story that privacy laws prevent a college from confirming or commenting on any allegations so that a reader would know how to put things in context and perspective.

No. But to me at least, your posts have a tendency to come across as equally agenda-driven. My apologies if I'm reading in more than is there, but that is the vibe I have gotten—partially, perhaps, because your posts (at least those I can recall) have been almost exclusively on this topic.

I completely agree. I heard many, many stories from concerned parents and grandparents about rape on the campus of UVA well before the Rolling Stones story. Also about "roofies" and other date rape drugs. None of this was manufactured nor was there any interest other than concern for these young women.

That said, Rolling Stone needs to be thumped and hard for their grossly irresponsible story.

Completely agree. And thank you for posting this.

I can't disagree with any of this, but it's definitely not the approach that has been taken by the vast majority of journalists who have been reporting on sexual assaults on college campuses. And it certainly wasn't the approach taken by Eardly in her RS piece. So, I'm commenting on the way things are, rather than the way they ought to be.

It's not that I don't think there are any problems on our college campuses with sexual assault, or with individual fraternity members/greek life. I don't have my head in the sand. I have a college junior daughter and two sons who are fairly recent graduates. Most of my friends have kids in this demographic.

But if expecting the media to report accurately and truthfully and with context and perspective is agenda - driven, then I guess I'm guilty. My personal opinion is that knowing the facts and talking honestly about the problems will allow us to come up with more workable policy and solutions.

It seems self evident that if the crisis is truly what the advocates are claiming, we would never have had the RS fiasco. It's a logical conclusion, but some are obviously not following logic.

My posts here are about this topic, so I'm sure that contributes to the "vibe". But this is just one small slice of the Internet and my posts here are just a tiny slice of my life, and it would definitely be reading more than it is to think this is the only topic I engage in or follow or am interested in.

Then to me, at least, what is self-evident is that journalistic ineptitude (or journalistic recklessness) and/or exploitation of the effects of privacy laws by advocates is the problem. It sounds like you're saying that it's self-evident that the problem is attributable to the privacy laws themselves.

Count me as one not following this logic. Even if the problem were as some claim, it would still be quite possible for a newspaper or magazine to publish a story with no basis in fact.

Fair enough. Sorry for any mistaken inferences.

I don't think I've made myself very clear - sorry. I'm not saying that privacy laws are "the problem". I'm saying its self-evident (to me) that we do have them (and should) and that journalists and advocates and even some who claim to be victims are exploiting those privacy laws and presenting a very narrow one-sided view of some of the high profile cases, and not making it at all clear to the public that the schools are constrained.

. I agree it would still be possible, but logically it would be much less likely. Look at the damage and fallout this has caused. As I made clear, I don't think RS or Eardly intentionally set out to create a hoax. But as she describes it:

"Erdely said she was searching for a single, emblematic college rape case that would show “what it’s like to be on campus now … where not only is rape so prevalent but also that there’s this pervasive culture of sexual harassment/rape culture,” according to Erdely’s notes of the conversation."

From the Washington Post:

"So, for six weeks starting in June, Erdely interviewed students from across the country. She talked to people at Harvard, Yale, Princeton and her alma mater, the University of Pennsylvania. None of those schools felt quite right. But one did: the University of Virginia, a public school, Southern and genteel, brimming with what Erdely calls “super-smart kids” and steeped in the legacy of its founder, Thomas Jefferson."

My point was that if there truly was the crisis and the pervasive rape culture that has been described over and over for the last few years, with 1 in 4 college women as victims, it would not have been hard to find actual real but "emblematic" examples of it, instead of getting taken by a hoax. It wouldn't be impossible, but it would be much less likely.

ETA - as further illustrative of the logic, the report makes clear that Erdely and RS had moments when they could have and should have become very skeptical of Jackie's story but chose to abandon basic journalism 101 practices instead. Why not just go find another "emblematic" but true story, if they are so prevelant.

No problem.

I feel like everyone is forgetting this one true/factual part of the RS article

The University of Virginia is one of the 86 schools now under federal investigation, but it has more reason to worry than most of its peers. Because, unlike most schools under scrutiny, where complaints are at issue, UVA is one of only 12 schools under a sweeping investigation known as "compliance review": a proactive probe launched by the Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights itself, triggered by concerns about deep-rooted issues. "They are targeted efforts to go after very serious concerns," says Office of Civil Rights assistant secretary Catherine Lhamon. "We don't open compliance reviews unless we have something that we think merits it."



Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/...#ixzz3Wff4OgoS
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

Yes the article is a hoax but that aside, there is still a problem with sexual assault at UVA. It's frustrating that because of all the fabrication the true facts in the article are forgotten.

And so UVA is guilty? Of deep rooted issues? Has OCR finished their compliance review, and if so, what were the findings?

IF you are still taking anything from Eardly's RS article as "true facts", including quotes attributed to anyone, I suggest you read the Columbia Journalism Review report. Check the footnotes. I think specifically #4.

Further info on the OCR compliance review...this UVA rape advocacy website claims that it was triggered by a lawsuit filed by a student who disputed the outcome of her SMB hearing because it found the student she accused "not guilty". This case was in the news a few times, there was a UVA forensic nurse whom the student accused of mishandling her evidence.

https://uvasexualassaultcoalition.wo...liance-review/

Anyways, in case anyone is interested, the lawsuit was dismissed last month.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2015/0...t-survivor.htm

Honorgal, What I DO take as "real facts" are what I have heard from friends who are mothers/grandmothers of UVA students. They were not making up what they told me. Nor was the concern they expressed for their beloved young women studying at UVA an overreaction or made up. These are very sophisticated women with experience with many different cultures of the world and are not easily intimidated or made fearful. And all this well BEFORE the Rolling Stones article.

The problem there is very real and has indeed been swept under the carpet for many, many years.

Are you saying that what I have heard directly from friends whose judgement I respect is a bunch of noise not related to the reality there?

I don't know if it's related to reality and neither do you. Let's deal in facts. Not feelings. Or second hand anecdotes. What are the supporting facts for your contention that "the problem there is very real and has been swept under the carpet for many, many years". Are you claiming this problem is unique to UVA culture?

I am dealing with facts.

It's a fact that UVA is under investigation for sexual assault related Title IX violations.

It's a fact that UVA is one of 12 schools receiving an even more in depth review due to the deep seeded problems with assault on that campus.

I understand the article is riddled with holes and inaccuracies pertaining to "Jackie" and her story.

But you can't throw the baby out with the bath water and ignore that UVA is one only 12 schools nation wide who is being investigated for serious sexual assault violations.