ATONE, ‘ STONE’!

If you’re a glutton for gory details, read the entire, 13,000word autopsy of the infamous Rolling Stone rape article done by a team from Columbia’s School of Journalism.

If you only want to understand the basics of what went wrong, just read the first paragraph. Here is how the Columbia team begins:

“Last July 8, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, a writer for Rolling Stone, telephoned Emily Renda, a rape survivor working on sexual assault issues as a staff member at the University of Virginia. Erdely said she was searching for a single, emblematic college rape case that would show ‘ what it’s like to be on campus now . . . where not only is rape so prevalent but also that there’s this pervasive culture of sexual harassment/ rape culture,’ according to Erdely’s notes of the conversation.”

That’s all you need. The writer wasn’t looking for a story. She was looking for a case that confirmed the story she already had in her head.

Everything else is detail. All other mistakes, such as not challenging the claims of the purported victim “Jackie” or being honest with the fraternity she would accuse of hosting a gang rape, are the fruit of the poisoned tree.

Erdely wasn’t going to let the facts get in the way of her story. The Columbia report, created at the request of Rolling Stone, reveals her to be more of an activist than a journalist. It also shows that her editors are guilty of not knowing the difference, or not caring.

Either way, it is hard to fathom publisher Jann Wenner’s claim that nobody involved would be fired or disciplined.

Perhaps he’s being coy as part of a legal strategy because the fraternity involved, the Virginia Alpha Chapter of Phi Kappa Psi, says it was damaged and defamed by the reckless accusations, and will file a lawsuit.

The courts are not my favored way of dealing with bad journalists, but this is no usual case. Rolling Stone deserves a thrashing, and maybe forcing Wenner to write a big check will bring him to his senses.