And that is just what the story of "Jackie" did. It jibed perfectly with the Democratic Party campaign strategy of fetishizing rape on college campuses, framing a felonious crime and its prevention into an identity-politics female empowerment movement. It deflected our attention from the inconvenient truth that the party of the New Deal and the Great Society has become the party of Wall Street and Permawar.
At the exact same time (last summer and fall) that Rolling Stone contributing editor Sabrina Rubin Erdely began issuing what amounted to a casting call for the ideal college rape victim to star in her blockbuster article, the White House was rolling out an anti-rape branding campaign called "It's On Us." The Democrats desperately needed a narrative to differentiate themselves from the Republicans for the upcoming midterms. They desperately needed a new wedge issue variant to counter the GOP's "war on women." The perceived epidemic of sexual assaults on college campuses fit the bill perfectly. Rather than talking about the rape of a nation by a gang of unprosecuted financial predators of Wall Street, we could talk about the rapes of young women by their unprosecuted predatory male peers on elite college campuses.
Mass post-meltdown public angst and outrage could be safely channeled by liberal leaders of the media-political complex. Nobody is a fan of rape, after all. We all have daughters, granddaughters, sisters and nieces. We can all relate.
Rolling Stone, an establishment magazine of "popular culture," knew a trending topic when it saw one. Sabrina Rubin Erdely found the ideal victim, and went on a sensationalistic rampage. Since the magazine was on a mission -- the cultural equivalent of William Randolph Hearst's fraudulent but splendid little warmongering, sparked by the explosion of The Maine -- no corroborating evidence, witnesses or basic fact-checking were required. "Jackie" was the co-invention of both Jackie and Sabrina. Facts would only have gotten in the way of the yellow journalism. It is a conspiracy by any other name.
Columbia University, in its "scathing" report of the fraud, called it a failure of journalism. It should be called a botched, failed, criminally dishonest marketing campaign. The magazine officials themselves are in "mistakes were made" mode. Nobody is admitting to perpetrating a fraud. Nobody will lose his or her job over the unfortunate little episode. The worst tragedy that could come out of the whole thing is if we stopped believing that campus rape is a real problem, if we automatically assume that every rape victim is lying. And that is why Rolling Stone "reached out" to a panel of independent investigators in order to discover "where they went wrong."
Editor Will Dana practically brays out the noblesse oblige as he humblebrags about his own innate decency:
Painful and sad.... but oh so fascinating, too! From now on, they will police themselves, just like a Wall Street bank. We apologize if you were offended. Your comfort is our deepest concern. If you are now afraid to report your rape, that makes us sad. But not sad enough to fire ourselves. Because even though the story was retracted, it got an amazing number of clicks when it was published. It attracted more than 2.7 million views, the most ever for an article "not about a celebrity."This report was painful reading, to me personally and to all of us at Rolling Stone. It is also, in its own way, a fascinating document — a piece of journalism, as Coll describes it, about a failure of journalism. With its publication, we are officially retracting 'A Rape on Campus.' We are also committing ourselves to a series of recommendations about journalistic practices that are spelled out in the report. We would like to apologize to our readers and to all of those who were damaged by our story and the ensuing fallout, including members of the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity and UVA administrators and students. Sexual assault is a serious problem on college campuses, and it is important that rape victims feel comfortable stepping forward. It saddens us to think that their willingness to do so might be diminished by our failings.
To its credit, the Columbia investigating team didn't buy Rolling Stone's self-protective altruism as an excuse. From the report:
Yet the explanation that Rolling Stone failed because it deferred to a victim cannot adequately account for what went wrong. Erdely's reporting records and interviews with participants make clear that the magazine did not pursue important reporting paths even when Jackie had made no request that they refrain. The editors made judgments about attribution, fact-checking and verification that greatly increased their risks of error but had little or nothing to do with protecting Jackie's position.
It would be unfortunate if Rolling Stone's failure were to deter journalists from taking on high-risk investigations of rape in which powerful individuals or institutions may wish to avoid scrutiny but where the facts may be underdeveloped. There is clearly a need for a more considered understanding and debate among journalists and others about the best practices for reporting on rape survivors, as well as on sexual assault allegations that have not been adjudicated. This report will suggest ways forward. It will also seek to clarify, however, why Rolling Stone's failure with "A Rape on Campus" need not have happened, even accounting for the magazine's sensitivity to Jackie's position. That is mainly a story about reporting and editing.
By the time Rolling Stone's editors assigned an article on campus sexual assault to Erdely in the spring of 2014, high-profile rape cases at Yale, Harvard, Columbia, Vanderbilt and Florida State had been in the headlines for months. The Office of Civil Rights at the federal Department of Education was leaning on colleges to reassess and improve their policies. Across the country, college administrators had to adjust to stricter federal oversight as well as to a new generation of student activists, including women who declared openly that they had been raped at school and had not received justice.
There were numerous reports of campus assault that had been mishandled by universities. At Columbia, an aggrieved student dragged a mattress around campus to call attention to her account of assault and injustice. The facts in these cases were sometimes disputed, but they had generated a wave of campus activism. "My original idea," Dana said, was "to look at one of these cases and have the story be more about the process of what happens when an assault is reported and the sort of issues it brings up."Erdely, ironically enough, boasts on her own website that she specializes in writing about fakes and frauds and weirdos: "She has written about con artists, murder investigations, vicious divorces, power brokers, lovable eccentrics, bioweapons, cults, sexual violence, medical ethics, hackers, LGBT issues, and teachers who have affairs with students—among other subjects."
Jackie's story seemed a powerful candidate for such a narrative.
She is a graduate of the Hearst School of Yellow Journalism. No, she isn't. I just made that up. She truthily dropped out of the Hearst School of Yellow Journalism before ever getting her degree. I didn't need a fact-checker for that fact, because there is, in fact, no such school. But it enhances my narrative.
The celebrity mattress-toting student was, in actual documented fact, a special guest at the narrative that was President Obama's State of the Union Address. (I am not making that up.) During February's televised Grammy Awards show, Obama himself in fact made a special cameo appearance to announce that "Rape is Not O.K." (although permawar and drone assassinations and financial crimes and deep-sea drilling and job-destroying secret corporate trade deals are still good to go.)
The Obama White House's campus rape fetish of a marketing campaign went into full swing last September, relying heavily on the same click-baiting culture of celebrity that Rolling Stone does.
Wired --another edgy culture-tech magazine -- called it "a smart branding campaign against sexual assault." (even though Obama's claim that one out of every five college women is sexually assaulted turned out to be wildly non-factual.)
The pre-midterm elections stunt was pure Madison Avenue, a direct creation of an advertising agency. It used celebrities (including, ironically, Jon Hamm, who plays an alcohol-soaked sexual predator on Mad Men) and a slogan -- "It's On Us" -- to deliver the heretofore unknown message that sex crimes are not cool. The subliminal message? Vote Democrat. GOP fetus-detecting vaginal wands, rapists' penises, they're all the same in the grand electoral scheme of things. From the Wired article:
After the White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault compiled a report on sexual assault in April, the White House and Generation Progress (an arm of the nonprofit Center for American Progress) decided to launch a campaign promoting “bystander intervention.”It's only a cynical hop skip and jump to the Tee shirts and testimonials and corporate sponsorships and interactive video games. You can even log on to take the It’s On Us pledge, and the website will generate a profile with your mug shot framed in the shape of the logo. (with the ultimate destination being the NSA Utah storage facility? It's an Obama two-fer!)
This is a new tack for these kinds of public service announcements: Rather than telling men ‘no means no,’ and instead of imploring women to report attacks when they happen, a bystander campaign calls on everyone to keep their eyes peeled and to create a culture that won’t tolerate sexual misconduct.
From there, Mekanism (the ad agency) essentially had free rein to whittle down the message. They pitched five ideas, almost went with “Get in the way,” and then settled on “It’s on us.” “The way most sexual assault messaging in the past has been, there’s a perpetrator and the victim and those are the two parties involved,” says David Horowitz, Mekanism’s creative director.
The Rolling Stone rape story has been lambasted as a travesty of journalism. But it's not journalism. It's political marketing. It never would have been made possible without a tacit grant from the big money-driven media-political complex. The article is not part of any problem. It's simply a part of the neoliberal solution: keeping the masses alternately ignorant, sedated, entertained, and terrorized.
That is a fact.
10 comments:
@Karen--
I applaud your courage and detailed attention to accuracy in writing and publishing this exposé of the pathetic Rolling Stone article, its “non-fallout” for any of the guilty principals involved, and the “mainstream Left's” ulterior motive in creating and perpetuating the myth of a “campus rape crisis” for pure political advantage.
But I fear that you will be the target of enormous backlash from that same mainstream Left. After all, you've helped to skewer and roast on a spit one of their most recent and powerful political “narratives.”
And we all know that “the narrative” has become ever so much more important than “the truth.” these days.
To liberally paraphrase a headline from an old New York Times article,
“The facts of the story were incontrovertibly fake, but the narrative was, nevertheless, accurate.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/politics/campaign/15guard.html?_r=0
Er...excuse me?
For real statistics on sexual assault in America, including on American college campuses, see
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf
According to Obama's own bought-and-paid-for Department of Justice, the incidence of rape and sexual assault on America's college campuses is 6.1 per 1,000, or 0.61%, not the popularly quoted “campus rape crisis rate” of 1 (female) student in 5, or 20%.
Big difference. But hey, why spoil a great “narrative” with facts?
@Karen--
I applaud your courage and detailed attention to accuracy in writing and publishing this exposé of the pathetic Rolling Stone article, its “non-fallout” for any of the guilty principals involved, and the “mainstream Left's” ulterior motive in creating and perpetuating the myth of a “campus rape crisis” for pure political advantage.
But I fear that you will be the target of enormous backlash from that same mainstream Left. After all, you've helped to skewer and roast on a spit one of their most recent and powerful political “narratives.”
And we all know that “the narrative” has become ever so much more important than “the truth.” these days.
To liberally paraphrase a headline from an old New York Times article,
“The facts of the story were incontrovertibly fake, but the narrative was, nevertheless, accurate.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/15/politics/campaign/15guard.html?_r=0
Er...excuse me?
For real statistics on sexual assault in America, including on American college campuses, see
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf
According to Obama's own bought-and-paid-for Department of Justice, the incidence of rape and sexual assault on America's college campuses is 6.1 per 1,000, or 0.61%, not the popularly quoted “campus rape crisis rate” of 1 (female) student in 5, or 20%.
Big difference. But hey, why spoil a great “narrative” with facts?
Zee,
Thank you. I am not courageous, just telling it as I see it, from that netherworld outside the permitted boundaries of the two national legacy parties.
I am sick of the application of "free market" solutions to everything that ails us. Now we have Nike (third world sweatshops making their overpriced fashions) and chauvinistic ESPN sponsoring anti-rape culture as a PR ploy at the same time that they air their violent sports programs. Obama purports to be on the side of college women, yet he permits an even worse rape culture to fester in the military. He refuses to remove prosecutions for sexual assaults from the chain of command and put them in the hands of civilian courts and prosecuting district attorneys. I hate it when politicians co-opt people to make themselves appear good and noble. And that goes for photo-ops with the wounded troops as well as using rape victims for votes.
There is plenty of hypocrisy to go around from both Rs and Ds. Clinton got a pass from the Dems, made all that much easier for them when pervs like Newt Gingrich and Larry from Idaho made hypocritic fools of themselves for lecturing him.
No backlash re my post, yet. And I'm not the only one criticizing this topic from the non-D left, far from it.
Richard Bradley didn't believe the Rolling Stone story. “Is the Rolling Stone Story True?”
http://www.richardbradley.net/shotsinthedark/2014/11/24/is-the-rolling-stone-story-true/
Bradley was skeptical because he had been fooled by the journalistic fraud Stephen Glass as an editor at George magazine.
Robby Soave at Reason.com asked “Is the UVA Rape Story a Gigantic Hoax?”
http://www.donotlink.com/framed?594028
Soave had written before, “It Was a Wild and Crazy Summer of Criminalizing Campus Sex,” that "in an effort to address sexual assault, college campuses are on the verge of entering into an Orwellian nightmare."
http://reason.com/archives/2014/08/27/it-was-a-wild-and-crazy-summer-of-crimin
Two men skeptics went over like a fart in church in certain feminist circles.
Jezebel’s Anna Merlin wrote that Soave “takes Bradley's giant ball of shit and runs with it.”
“In summary, what we have here are two dudes who have some vague suspicions and, on that basis, are implying that Ederley either fabricated her story or failed to do her due diligence and didn't fact check what Jackie told her…But never mind Erdely's months of work. Two guys who have no idea what they're talking about don't believe it. Case closed.”
http://jezebel.com/is-the-uva-rape-story-a-gigantic-hoax-asks-idiot-1665233387
Richard Bradley reactions to Columbia Journalism School’s report on the Rolling Stone/Sabrina Rubin Erdely/Jackie fiasco:
http://www.richardbradley.net/shotsinthedark/2015/04/07/in-the-end-its-all-about-rape-culture-or-the-lack-thereof/
Bradley says Columbia made one big, fundamental mistake.
“The only part of Sabrina Rubin Erdely’s article closely examined by Columbia was the lede, which detailed Jackie’s incredible story of gang rape… this article was not really about Jackie…The article was about the existence of rape culture and university indifference to said culture…
“Sabrina Rubin Erdely was not first and foremost trying to obtain justice for Jackie; that was incidental. Her intention was to prove the existence of rape culture and to shame and ostracize those whom she fervently believed participated in it. When you know how Rubin Erdely went about her work, you are forced to conclude that she failed, that the rest of her story is as unbelievable as Jackie’s story—it’s just concocted in a slicker way. In the ongoing debate about sexual assault on campus, we must remember this.”
“You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you odd.” - Flannery O'Connor
Karen......pardon my foggy brain--- what do you mean the mattress toting student was in documented fact a guest ‘at the narrative’ of obama’s speech? So meaning she was present at the narrative of the sotu address bc he cited rape generally? Or present at the speech...I’m a little confused. Surely not at the event.
Very unfortunate atrocious journalism has to affect the rape issue. Despite the trouble she caused, I feel very sorry for the rape accuser, if she made up this horror, she must be in such a bad way. Then someone exploits her story and her. What has become of her?
Maybe the RS journalist, if not actually fired, will soon be looking for another job anyway? Could they keep her on, into the future?
In our politics anything can be exploited by both parties using different shades of meaning.
We see a pattern. Because no one is ever punished, we see continued killings by cops, rapes on campus. If no legal consequences, the message is sent by our officials, it's bad, but not that bad, despite all their shock and dismay. But it's astounding rape could be so prevalent to need congressional hearings. The 1 in 5 number of assault should be better analyzed, but I haven't see it.
I’d like to see comparative data on rape incidence in other countries' colleges and military. Do they refer cases to outside law enforcement, or try to handle it ‘in house’?
Do European universities have fraternities?
Meredith,
I was being a bit snarky. If you click the link in my post, it takes you to a Daily News (thence to New York Magazine) article about the mattress-toting performance artist. She was invited to the SOTU by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand and also got her pic taken with John Kerry. To her credit, she is very upfront about her purpose being performance art rather than social protest. She is fully aware that she is an actress in a narrative being exploited for identity politics purposes as opposed to social welfare purposes. She is not pursuing a criminal case against her alleged attacker, whom she has named. Interesting that she is a student at Columbia U., whose journalism school was selected by Rolling Stone to investigate the UVa article.
I realize that the right wing noise machine is milking the "liberal narrative" angle for all it's worth and lumping it together with cop killings of black people and obscene wealth disparity and other social evils which they claim are highly exaggerated. Unfortunately, I think it's the state violence and war crimes and endemic racism and political corruption being under-reported, while campus rape stats are indeed overblown. Zee's figures,above, are pretty accurate. It's nowhere near one in five women being attacked.
While I'm on this, did you notice that the guy whom the White House/CAP chose for its website mug-shot is black? This is what they call "colorblind racism" -- which sends a more discreet, politically correct message: to wit, it's on the black dudes to appear less threatening.
Meredith,
Forgot to address your question about "Jackie."
She may be troubled, but she is also a highly skilled actress and manipulator, a person who in some politically incorrect circles might even be called a psychopath. She was able to perpetrate her fraud because the reporter had an agenda, and saw what she wanted to see and heard what she wanted to hear. It's how journalists get snookered all the time. In my previous life as a reporter, I learned to recognize the con artists, but only after much practice and some solid editorial guidance and oversight. There are always people wanting to feed you a scoop, or sell you a conspiracy theory for purposes ranging from simple eliciting of sympathy to revenge-by-newspaper.
Jackie reminds me of the anti-heroine in "Gone Girl."
Denis,
Thanks for sharing the Flannery O'Connor quote, it made me laugh as well as tempt me to steal it for my own nefarious purposes. I am thinking of a postage stamp.
I hadn't known about the earlier debunking of the RS piece by Richard Bradley. I see from reading his original piece that the Lean In Trickle-Down corporate feminism crowd went ballistic when his criticism first appeared. Glad to see that he is vindicated. Of course the right wing media crowd is also going nuts, braying that this example of journalistic fraud is also proof that rape itself does not exist.
Karen, I went to ny mag. Yikes, Gillibrand invited her to Obama sotu? It's not a joke? I googled it and got scads of rw sites in vituperative mode. Gillibrand ran Senate hearings on assault in military and campuses. She seems to lack judgment...got to be a better way than this sensationalist crap.
You know, I think ‘performance art’ is just what describes some or most our politicians, or maybe most. Why not, they only are responsible to their donors. Sounds like a great article for somebody to write.
re the White House/CAP website mug-shot---i noticed he was dark skinned. I stared at it, puzzled and moved on. So much news today, so little time! Thanks for your informative posts on the weird world of politics.
And I heard this ex-marine dude who happened to be CEO of my company "back in the day" say ".... we can squash 'em like a bug...." to a room full of fist-pumping sales-youngsters. Just like in the movie!
The capitalist foolishness and the lies of this (and O.) are one of the reasons I will leave Amerika before I die. Can I get you another ad for your "free" website?
Post a Comment