• jemory posted a new activity comment 5 years ago

    Yes, they should not have published the story that they did.

    After some further research, it seems the reporter did a pretty haphazard job all around.

    Generally, for journalists one person’s word is actually not enough evidence to run a story. What you do is take that person’s word and then try to independently verify as much of it as you…[Read more]

  • jemory posted a new activity comment 5 years ago

    Exactly. As a journalist myself, I cringed as I read that letter.

    Rolling Stone is caught between a rock and a hard place, which means there isn’t a good option.

    If they no longer have confidence in their story as they told it, then they have no choice but to retract it. But as Amy correctly points out, the retraction itself will have…[Read more]

    • d506 replied 5 years ago

      “[…] clearly they shouldn’t have run the story in the shape it was in.”

      Are you sure? Again, the Rolling Stone telling this woman that her word wasn’t enough evidence to run this story seems to be exactly what the BelieveHer campaign is fighting against. We can’t tell people to believe victims and then criticize them when it turns out they w…[Read more]

      • There is a big difference between believing someone and retelling a story without thorough (or even rudimentary) investigation, at least if you care about your journalistic integrity.

        It seems they did not do due diligence in this case; It’s one thing to protect the accuser by not contacting the accused but they don’t appear to have done…[Read more]

      • Yes, they should not have published the story that they did.

        After some further research, it seems the reporter did a pretty haphazard job all around.

        Generally, for journalists one person’s word is actually not enough evidence to run a story. What you do is take that person’s word and then try to independently verify as much of it as you…[Read more]