I mean I have no way of knowing for sure really, but I think when multiple levels of journalism checking measures fail like that you have to assume interference from the publisher

A throw away line saying ‘my bad’ isn’t a goddamned apology. Surely Anna learned that since she’s a hot shot Columbia J-School grad who does tons of investigative repor—HAHAHH

KBS is fucking awesome, that is all. I could drink this all day, and it's so damn smooth you'd never know how much booze is in it.

where are these apologies?? I’ve not seen one and I browse all of the gawker sites pretty frequently

link? because it sure as hell isn’t very prominently featured

fair enough, but at this point if you’re against the frat suing the pants off of RS, then you’d better be against the next time a woman/left leaning group gets taken to the ringer by a negligent writer

Did you see how she responded to writers saying the reporting on the story was utter shit?? There’s a damn good reason she’s getting called out, and Anna still hasn’t posted something acknowledging that she was a total asshole to someone who brought up a valid point.

The follow up was basically that RS and the writer blamed Jackie and not themselves for journo 101 failings, and Wenner still plans to let his little hack write for them!

She’s not brave at all. Take a gander at what this asshole wrote to somone mentioning how shoddy the reporting was:

the only way it isn’t incompetent, Wenner definitely knew this was coming and oked it

Did you see how she responded to writers saying the reporting on the story was utter shit?? There’s a damn good reason she’s getting called out, and Anna still hasn’t posted something acknowledging that she was a total asshole to someone who brought up a valid point.

But you did write this: http://jezebel.com/is-the-uva-rap…

Jackie absolutely bears blame, and anyone disagreeing about that is outting themselves as an idiot, but RS pointing the finger at her is so hilarious, depressing, and stupid at the same time.

I don’t know if it really started a dialogue, but as much as there are still a bunch of idiots repeating RAPE APOLOGIST over and over and over (here’s looking at you Anna Merlan), I will admit that there were more people than I thought on gawker who realize you can be anti rape but question people.

He’s one of the few auto-reads out there in journalism overall. But other than that, I feel RS has been agenda first, story second for a while now on the whole. Taibbi obviously had a very definite leaning, but actually did his homework, and is an excellent writer

Oh yeah I loved them for years but I just feel even before this that the hit/miss ratio included way more misses in the past half decade or so. But in all honesty, not just the story, but Jann’s absolutely retarded response, I have no intention of reading them again, and really hope they close up shop sooner than…

editor hahahaha. Gawker’s standards make RS look like the NYT by comparison

Then how about an apology of your own because that was fucking gross and stupid. That’s exactly the kind of stupid shit that feeds MRA retards. There were more than enough holes in the RS story to bring up doubt and you sat there calling people idiots and stroking your ego.

What courage?? Did you read any of the horseshit Anna wrote? She basically spent her entire time calling people idiots for suggesting something was amiss when there were so many question marks and obvious shoddy reporting. Anna’s a massive fucking jerkoff on the level of RS

Yeah exactly. There’s room for that kind of slant in long form writing while still doing your basic homework. There ain’t room for that shit in investigative stuff like this.