Jury finds reporter, Rolling Stone responsible for defaming U-Va. dean with gang rape story

[DonViejo]

Source: The Washington Post

By T. Rees Shapiro November 4 at 1:47 PM

CHARLOTTESVILLE — A federal court jury decided Friday that a Rolling Stone journalist defamed a former University of Virginia associate dean in a 2014 magazine article about sexual assault on campus that included a debunked account of a fraternity gang rape.

The 10 member jury concluded that the Rolling Stone journalist was responsible for defamation, with actual malice, in the case brought by Nicole Eramo, a U-Va. administrator who oversaw sexual violence cases at the time of the article’s publication. The jury also found the magazine and its publisher responsible for defaming Eramo.

The $7.5 million lawsuit centered on the 9,000-word article written by Sabrina Rubin Erdely titled “A Rape on Campus.” The article appeared online in late Nov. 2014 and on newsstands in the magazine’s December 2014 issue.

The story opened with a graphic depiction of a fraternity gang rape that went viral online and sent shock waves across the U-Va. campus community. But within days of the article’s publication, key elements of the account fell apart under scrutiny. The magazine eventually retracted the story in April 2015.

-snip-

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/jury-finds-reporter-rolling-stone-responsible-for-defaming-u-va-dean-with-gang-rape-story/2016/11/04/aaf407fa-a1e8-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html?wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-local%252Bnational

[MadDAsHell]

1. Media wants sensationalism, not truth. And they paid for it this time. nt

[iandhr]

2. There are plenty of real incidents of cover up of rape on campuses...

... that can and should be investigated by the press without making something up.


And one of the more negative things about this case is that it will make it harder to get justice for victims in the future.

[run_mac_run]

3. To quote Mr Burns..!!! EXCELLENT !!!

hopefully media will now stick to FACTS and stop reporting stories based on an agenda.

[Democat]

4. Shows the danger of assuming guilt

No matter what crime someone is accused of, there must be evidence.

[SpankMe]

5. Conservatives will have a field day with this.

Rolling Stone's journalism has been pretty solid since its founding. This is but one mistake based on the lie of a victim, and the bias and over-zealousness of a journalist. I really don't believe that Rolling Stone presented the story in this way for sensationalistic purposes. They did a rush job, blinded by their admittedly liberal editorial bias, in order to present a shocking account of a rape in service of a feminist perspective.

Their response (i.e., promise to do better in the future) was genuine and I think they'll continue their great journalism.

Given the high levels of "journalism" that is seen in other areas of the MSM, I'd say this isn't a big deal.

[DrToast]

6. Why Conservatives? RS screwed up big time

They got what they deserved, IMO.

[yardwork]

7. Numerous levels of editorial oversight failed.

This is a big deal for RS and I'm not sure they will ever recover their reputation.

The external review concluded that RS failed to ensure basic journalistic integrity and oversight. This is not a small indie zine. Rolling Stone's editors didn't do basic fact checking. They never should have published the story without corroboration.

[MadDAsHell]

8. It's a very big deal to the lives they ruined.

And while some at Rolling Stone may not have been trying to be sensational, the picture that they used absolutely was:

Neon colors, a woman's body covered by handprints, etc.

In my personal opinion, very little about that article wasn't intended to be sensational and draw more readers.

[The River]

9. Local Coverage

Here: http://www.c-ville.com/news/