Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticCat
Hoax? That's a loaded word. I haven't seen any evidence of a hoax, at least on RS's part. Fiasco, yes, but not hoax.
|
Point taken. I definitely didn't make my use of that word clear. It was a hoax on Jackie's part, a fiasco (of their own making) on RS's part.
Quote:
|
I don't think that's self-evident at all, unless it is also self-evident that no reporters will ever do enough homework to understand the basics of what they're reporting on.
|
It has nothing to do with a reporter's homework or understanding the basics. The part that is self-evident is the extremely strict privacy laws that protect this particular subject matter (
college sexual assault allegations) from being routinely fact-checked by journalists seeking the truth. The universities are routinely being accused of all manner of coverups, from indifference to gross negligence. A lot of people, given the comments on this thread, take this (and other myths, like the 1 in 4 statistic) as an established fact. Is it? Was UVA negligent in their handling of the Jackie hoax? They obviously have known much more of the facts from the beginning of the hoax and the fiasco. In other circumstances, they would have been able to speak out immediately upon publication of the RS article. They are not able to correct the journalistic record in sexual assault cases.
Quote:
|
Perhaps one day you'll let us know why you seem to have as much of an axe to grind on this issue as those you constantly accuse of manufacturing a rape crisis.
|
Wanting the facts reported instead of agenda-driven journalism is axe-grinding?
Threaded Mode
