Rolling Stone, rape journalism and corrections.

Which American institution is more broken right now, our criminal justice system, our our media?

 

Oh, stop. We can talk about individual cases, but don't knee-jerk pick them out as emblematic of some systemic breakdown. Failures makes better headlines than successes, so that's why both of these instances have legs. If you don't resist arrest, your odds of getting dead drop precipitously; and one slack-ass editing cycle at the Rolling Stone doesn't negate the fact that UVA has never kicked any yahoo out for rape. But yeah, double down and let's go for an even bigger headline: "Grand Jury and Media caught in a 69. Who's to blame?"

 

You ever notice how he slips in with these media-hate one-liners, and doesn't answer when you call him on it?

 

McCrystal was a one-source interview, where they printed what he said; his thoughts on the war and the President. It was a recorded interview. Great journalism? More like fortunate with a straight-forward one-on-one interview. And a much different animal than this undertaking.

Again, I don't read RS, but I think their editors were in way over their heads here. And, again, it showed.

Erdely, based on her bio, should have known better. It seems clear she had an agenda and RS - willing or not - gave her the green light.
As I posted on the other thread, it leads me to think a lot of magazine editors that published her work will review it.

Is her career over? It should be. But it won't be. If so, she should spend the next few years covering dog shows for US Weekly. And never be allowed to approach anything close to a criminal or investigative piece again. I imagine her work - because she's a known commodity - will prolly pop up again within a year in a few well-known magazines (The New Republic?).
The same should be true with RS and its editors. They should be fired. Doubt it will happen though.

 

Oh come on. Of course people will be fired at RS.

You don't think journalists will hold themselves responsible?

 

Another version of 2. Begin with your answer instead of a true journalist's question and go about fitting everything to it.

Happening all the time in this age of "advocacy journalism." All the bleeding hearts/big egos figure they already know how things "should" be and want to demonstrate how right they are to the less-gifted and less-enlightened. Ain't journalism.

 

Maybe you could throw some work to a copy editor.

 

You know, I'm not even asking folks who live in glass houses to not throw stones. Throw them all you want.

But, maybe as you lob the rocks at other institutions, you should at least admit to the fragility of your own home, and be looking to take some steps to make it stronger.

There are major problems within journalism today -- especially narrative journalism. And, when are there ever any consequences?

Will anyone get fired at RS? Did anyone at ESPN/Grantland suffer any consequences for the Dr. V story? Has Leah McGrath Goodman, or anyone else, suffered any consequences for the flawed Newsweek story on the "Face Behind Bitcoin"?

Peter King is the top football writer in America. He's been exposed as a hack, but hasn't missed a day's work.

The New York Times plagiarizes a satirical news site. Anyone get fired over that one?

Over the last 48 hours, lots of folks were decrying the departure of Franklin Foer from the New Republic. He was held up as some sort of heroic journalist. How many mentioned, or even remembered, that he was the guy who published, and defended, "Baghdad Diarist" Scott Thomas Beauchamp.

He should have been fired seven years ago. Instead, he leaves as a martyr to good journalism.

 

Nobody's denying the industry is fucked-up.
Make sure you throw your stones at the top floor.

Most journalists on this board are working harder than ever.

 

The recent story I find most indicative of the reluctance of journalists to say "Yeah, we kinda messed up that one somewhat badly" is the almost complete lack of mea culpas regarding the Manti T'eo fake dead girlfriend stories.

 

Yeah, YF, it's only the most successful people in the industry who fuck up. The weeklies have a deep fact-checking process.

 

I guess I'm lost here. Are you both under the impression that bad-practicing journalists never get in trouble?