Sometimes it's good to read what the other side is saying and I think that's especially true in this case where what happened is a black eye for liberalism. I'm not saying it is a black eye only that it appears to be a black eye, which means in our appearance-obsessed culture, it's a black eye.
Rolling Stone has made things worse for liberals by equivocating about what went wrong. They acknowledge a massive failure, but then say nothing needs to change about their editing and fact-checking process. This is like saying I caused a major car crash, but it was a one time thing, I'm not going to change the way I'm driving. Whenever something goes wrong in government, liberals expect a lot of soul searching, full accountability, and reform. Rolling Stone is falling far short of that standard.
But on to the wrap-up of conservative viewpoints:
First, the silly and senseless.
Conservative radio host Dennis Prager is basically claiming the whole rape issue is a hoax.
It’s a gargantuan lie to get votes. It’s as big a lie as the culture of rape on your campuses. What nonsense. ... One in 5 women are sexually assaulted on campuses. Do you know what sexual assault means? Did you ever look at what counts? An unwanted kiss is considered sexual assault. I’m stunned it's only 1 in 5. Four out of five women have not gotten an unwanted kiss? My wife gets unwanted kisses every so often.
Over at the
Weekly Standard, the pundits are saying what you'd expect—the reporter had a liberal bias she was pursuing, facts and the truth be damned. It's an example of p.c. groupthink--
It was also known that (reporter Sabrina Rubin) Erdely had an agenda from the start and let her bias get in the way of the facts. She went on a fishing expedition for the most horrific rape story she could find on an elite college campus.
The
National Review's Jonah Goldberg basically makes the same point:
the real culprit here is ideological groupthink in service to a political agenda. According to the report, the editors were “unanimous” in their insistence that their procedures work just fine (though they’ve since backtracked). Wenner says he will not punish or fire anyone. Erdely will write for Rolling Stone again. Why? Because in their hearts they’re sure they were right, and that’s all that matters.
There's lots of outrage that the
reporter's apology made no mention of the harm the story did to the fraternity at UVA and UVA in general. After all, the story was a larger investigation into the rape culture at the school where students and administrators were depicted as indifference to women's suffering. This may still be true, but nobody is likely to believe it now. You'll see most of this sort of griping on Twitter:
Phil Kerpen @kerpen Apr 5
UNREAL. @SabrinaRErdely apologizes to her @RollingStone colleagues but not to Phi Kappa Psi.
Milo Yiannopoulos @Nero Apr 5
. @SabrinaRErdely’s “apology” is a load of pathetic self-pity. No apology to fraternity. No acknowledgment of the damage her sloppiness did.
Here's what I think is the real problem--we really don't know how prevalent sexual assault is on campus.
The numbers are based on a Justice Department study that has huge holes.
And the question is not just is it prevalent, but how does the rate of prevalence compare to the situation outside the academy?
According to the CDC, one in twenty women experience sexual violence other than rape, one in five experience rape. The federal government study found one in five women on campus experience sexual assault. That suggests campuses are more dangerous, but both studies may not be defining sexual assault in the same way. And the Justice Dept study focuses on all women, not just college age.
All I'm saying is that liberals should be guarded when asserting there is an epidemic of rape on college campuses. I suspect there is, but that's mainly what it is--a suspicion.