Don't get too cocky, New York Times!
The NYT is casting stones ..... better board up all those glass windows!!!
How long after the publication of the original story did it take for these poltroons to cough up an apology for perpetrating a massive hoax? Nearly a year? Why the hell did it take so long, anyway?
Remember the Duke lacrosse players? Who fixed their reputations?
MSM employees to devise ways to avoid.. getting caught.
Never fear, leftists will come out and say “Hey it doesn’t matter that this story was complete horse poop and that people’s lives were ruined because of it, rape happens everywhere therefore this BS story was justified”
Columbia Graduate School of Journalism
Fancy name, no credibility.
The New York Times acts as if this is something that happened to someone else.
Sabrina’s Home Page on her website says...
Award-winning
freelance magazine journalist
It should read instead...
Without Credibility
freelance magazine journalist
Her email doesn’t allow an email to be sent. It’s locked.
She also ruined reputations and lives in Philadelphia, Pa. with her 2011 story titled:
The Catholic Church’s Secret Sex-Crime Files:
Rolling Stones says no conflict of interest that Sabrina’s husband was District Attorney in Philadelphia at the time of her (now discredited) hit piece...
Unless she decides to to transition to pure (or unpure) fiction, she needs to start writing about discredited journalists instead of fictional sex abuse while calling it journalism...
Elderly wrote an apology today, April 5, 2015...
“However, in the case of Jackie and her account of her traumatic rape, I did not go far enough to verify her story.”
Hey, Alexis, the same goes for your 2011 story...
Wikipedia writes about your hit piece on the Catholic Church titled: “The Catholic Church’s Secret Sex-Crime Files”
In the first iteration of the rape Billy Doe claimed to have endured, he was knocked unconscious, stripped, tied to a church altar with sashes, and then anally raped on the altar for five hours. Subsequent iterations of the rape recounted by Billy Doe became increasingly less dramatic; a final version omitted the five-hour altar anal rape. Instead, Billy Doe explained, he had been coerced into engaging in mutual masturbation. Cipriano also criticized Erdely for failing to include information on Billy Doe’s background that could have impugned his credibility; he had, for instance, been arrested six times, once while trafficking 56 bags of heroin.
I invite you and our readers to go to that website... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabrina_Erdely
They don’t care. They are just concerned it affects their image and bottom line.
It has been the overarching pattern of the late 20th and early 21st century media in the United States in toto, and so this hardly serves as an excuse. One might excuse Charles Manson on the same basis.
Here is the NYT report of the “apology”:
On Sunday, Ms. Erdely, in her first extensive comments since the article was cast into doubt, apologized to Rolling Stone’s readers, her colleagues and “any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article.”
Hmmm. Anybody missing from that apology? Aren’t people falsely accused of rape entitled to an apology?
If this is an accurate reporting of the extent of the apology, it could be evidence that the article was intentionally defamatory.
The opening pages of the Rolling Stone article [9,000 words long: "A Rape on Campus"], which was published in November.
Statements from Sabrina Rubin Erdely, the author and Teresa A. Sullivan, the president of the University of Virginia, in Charlottesville.
13,000 words long: The Columbia report [commissioned by Rolling Stone] cataloged a series of errors at Rolling Stone...