4 ms·
Another classic: https://jezebel.com/is-the-uva-rape-story-a-gigantic-hoax-asks-idiot-1665233387 https://jezebel.com/is-the-uva-rape-story-a-gigantic-hoax-as...
by Manuel_D 3y ago
Another classic: https://jezebel.com/is-the-uva-rape-story-a-gigantic-hoax-asks-idiot-1665233387 https://jezebel.com/is-the-uva-rape-story-a-gigantic-hoax-as...
- kergonath 3y agoTitle: “'Is the UVA Rape Story a Gigantic Hoax?' Asks Idiot”, published December 1. First link below: “Rolling Stone Partially Retracts UVA Story Over 'Discrepancies'”, published December 5. That’s quite a feat.
- weeblewobble 3y agoFor whatever it’s worth, the “first link below” story contains this quote from the author of the first story “ This is really, really bad. It means, of course, that when I dismissed Richard Bradley and Robby Soave's doubts about the story and called them "idiots" for picking apart Jackie's account, I was dead fucking wrong, and for that I sincerely apologize.”
- kergonath 3y agoIndeed. Without as much as a hint of questioning why they felt completely normal to write the previous article with such stupid headline and content. If it were a company, we’d say it was a non-apology apology and that it shows they don’t want to admit the problem.
- tqi 3y agoI think it's telling that the author's remorse was for being mean to a fellow opinion writer, as opposed to fomenting a culture of guilty until proven innocent
- rmilejczz 3y agoEach of those links is a published correction and retraction of previous statements as new information came to light so they seem like principled journalists, with their tongues planted firmly in their cheeks.