Features Editor
Rolling Stone magazine
published an inflammatory article titled “A Rape on Campus” in its December
2014 issue, detailing an alleged gang rape that occurred at the University of
Virginia. Ever since its publication the article has garnered controversy not
only for its subject matter, but also for alleged gaps in its story. This led
to Rolling Stone officially pulling
the article from publication on April 5.
The
article detailed the story of a woman who identified herself as Jackie, who
alleged that members of the University of Virginia’s Phi Kappa Psi fraternity
brutally gang raped her for hours as a twisted induction ritual for new
pledges, eventually rendering her unconscious. The gruesome details of the
story led to the fraternity house being vandalized amidst protests raging
outside. Though it accomplished its goal of stirring up sentiments about rape
on college campuses and negative influences that Greek life on campus can
bring, many parts of the story were called out for being inconsistent. This
eventually led many in the journalism community to decry the article as flat
fabrication. Police later investigated and found that there was no wrongdoing
on the part of the fraternity. The writer of the article came under fire, being
accused of writing with an agenda, calling into question the ethics of
journalism and journalistic integrity.
The
main error in the article was taking a vivid and sensational account from
Jackie via impersonal interviews such as phone calls as fact with little to no
fact-checking. After the story was published, the truth of the story slowly
unraveled as the man who Jackie identified as the one who initiated the rape
was discovered to not exist. Jackie claimed to be bruised and bloodied after
the event, calling her friends for help at 3 a.m. However, these friends have
later come to say that Jackie called at 1 a.m. with no signs of being hurt. The
friends were interviewed for the article, but have publicly stated that their
interviews were manipulated to corroborate the story. The fraternity in
question also came out to say that no fraternity party occurred on the night
that Jackie claimed to be raped and that no new members even lived there during
that time of the year. The article also lacked any interviews from campus or
fraternity officials which made both appear indifferent to the issue, something
that made the story appear to have more power. A brutal rape on campus being
ignored and tossed under the mat by campus officials, how enticing of a story.
Maybe had both groups denied to be interviewed; however, not even involving
them in the article in any capacity is heinously biased, a violation of the
principle of impartialness in journalism. While people were debating the
veracity of this article, actual rape
cases sprang up at universities such as Vanderbilt which received less coverage
in the media. This article, in attempting to expose the problem, actually led
to its ignorance.
This
article not only violated the principles of journalism, but also set back how
we deal with rape by decades. How do you think people will react to accounts of
rape with this sensationalist and completely falsified article fresh on their
minds? It will only led to increases in victim blaming and ignorance of the
crime, leading to fewer victims being willing to come out and seek the help
that they need.
