4 ms·
Even if the source told the reporter the names, all she's got is her word, and that's not enough evidence for the New York Times to print something like that. (
by gabrielroth 17y ago
Even if the source told the reporter the names, all she's got is her word, and that's not enough evidence for the New York Times to print something like that. (And for good reason: it shouldn't be possible to smear someone without evidence, not to mention that the paper would be vulnerable to a libel suit.) You mention 'documentary proof,' but there's no suggestion in the story that she has any.
To be clear, I'm not suggesting that she's not telling the truth -- just that reasonable journalistic standards sometimes result in important information being withheld.
- jimbokun 17y ago"Even if the source told the reporter the names, all she's got is her word," and maybe a photo of a naked guy on a boat.
- gabrielroth 17y ago"Another potential backer invited her for a weekend yachting excursion by showing her a picture of himself on the boat — without clothes." [emphasis mine] Sounds like the creep was smart enough not to give her the picture.
- akkartik 17y agoI'm willing to bet the anonymization isn't coming from the journalist. In general, victims should just post/tweet charges under their real names. The internet will pick it up, link to it, retweet it. Even journalists will give it press as 'alleged charges'. That it's not anonymous will give it weight.