The digital media is lit up like a Christmas tree in a buzz over the fact that Rolling Stone is backing off on its highly sensational story about a fraternity gang rape on the campus of the University of Virginia. At this point its all very clumsy. They have not actually retracted the story but they have posted a public statement casting doubt on the credibility of the woman who was the source for the story. Rolling Stone has a generally good reputation as a sound publication. It is their job as responsible journalists to only publish material after they have made a through attempt to determine the accuracy of it. The dust is still settling on this. I found an account on Vox that is written with some clarity. If its version of what happened in reasonably accurate, then I take it to be a serious indictment of Sabrina Rubin Erdely. the reporter who did the story.
Rolling Stone didn't just fail readers — it failed Jackie, too
The details of the infamous gang rape at UVA, reported in Rolling Stone last month, are now in doubt. But here's what isn't. The magazine might have thought it was protecting Jackie, whose story about a traumatic experience is at the heart of the article. Instead, by not pushing for more details, they did her a terrible disservice.
They let the force of a 9,000-word story on a national problem rest entirely on the memories of a traumatized college student.
The reporter, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, seems to have thought she was respecting Jackie's boundaries by not interviewing her alleged rapists. She has said that Jackie asked her not to reach out to the supposed assailant, and Erdely says she complied. According to the Washington Post, she never even knew his full name.
This is one item that particularly concerns me.
I don't know what happened between Jackie and Erdely. But Jackie told the Washington Post that after the first interview, she wanted out of the story — she was traumatized and decided she hated the idea of everyone reading about the worst night of her life. Erdely told her she couldn't back out. If true, that's a horrifying breach of trust between reporter and subject.
The general picture of Jackie is of a person who has experienced serious trauma. She had never filed a complaint with the police or with campus authorities. She did not come looking for Erdely. Erdely found in a rape survivors support group. Her claim is that she accepted Jackie's constraints about interviewing other people involved in her story out of sensitivity for her emotional situation. Yet when that emotional situation compels Jackie to want to withdraw from the arrangement she puts strong emotional pressure on her. This really doesn't add up well.
I am not in a position to know what the facts in this matter really are. But it is beginning to look as though whatever Ms. Erdely's agenda was, she has not served to cause for the rights of rape victims very well. This is a big mess about an issue that is a very serious matter.