Rolling Stome Mag loosesd defamtion case after "Jackie" story.

Clanrickard

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
33,164
Rolling Stone Mag loses defamtion case after "Jackie" story.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/08/rolling-stone-jackie-trial-rape-university-administrator-awarded-3m-defamation

Rolling Stone ran a piece about a girl called Jackie who was raped at a Frat house at Virginia University. Needless to say there was outrage with the usual suspects hyperventilating about the "Rape Culture" and so on. Turns out the story was bogus and I am delighted to report Rolling Stone have been given a kick in the backside with a 3 million dollar award to the University administrator Nicole Eramo who was vilified in the piece. The Fraternity is also suing. This case will leave a lot of red faces around amongst those who jumped to conclusions and attacked the University and the Fraternity.
 
Last edited:


Prester Jim

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
9,977
Zooooooo!
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
22,635
Zooooooo!
I see no reason why it should be Zoo'd. It meets all the criteria for an OP (link with brief summary, expresses an opinion & it's written in such a way to facilitate discussion), and it's in the correct forum.

Given the above would you care to expand on why it should be in the Zoo?
 

'orebel

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
20,151
It's a very common English word - I think you spend a couple of hours on Google looking it up.
Would it be used in the 'Rolling Stome' mag?
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
83,467
I see no reason why it should be Zoo'd. It meets all the criteria for an OP (link with brief summary, expresses an opinion & it's written in such a way to facilitate discussion), and it's in the correct forum.

Given the above would you care to expand on why it should be in the Zoo?
Mind you, I hope Clan does us all a favo(u)r and asks their modlinesses to sort out the title....
 

'orebel

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
20,151
'Rolling Stome'
'loosesd'
'defamtion'

C'mon man!
 

Spanner Island

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
23,974
The typical "liberal" answer to everything they don't like.

If there's an issue, address it, if not, shut up and move on.
There's an issue alright... in fact more than one...

1. There's a 'rape culture'
2. There's a 'false accusation culture'.
3. There's a 'lazy arsed media culture'.

Depending on how you think you may be thrilled about Rolling Stone getting screwed for its laziness... or perhaps thrilled that this false accusation plants seeds of doubt in every accusation of rape... or perhaps something else...

Overall it's just sad imo and not something to be point scoring about.

I'm not convinced that those who are accused should be publicly named. That is a flaw and I don't buy the argument that because naming suspects before they're charged may encourage others to come forward justifies them being named.
 

GDPR

1
Joined
Jul 5, 2008
Messages
217,846
There's an issue alright... in fact more than one...

1. There's a 'rape culture'
2. There's a 'false accusation culture'.
3. There's a 'lazy arsed media culture'.

Depending on how you think you may be thrilled about Rolling Stone getting screwed for its laziness... or perhaps thrilled that this false accusation plants seeds of doubt in every accusation of rape... or perhaps something else...

Overall it's just sad imo and not something to be point scoring about.
If I were trilled at all and I'm not, it would be at the warning against group think and the readiness of the media to jump in on what they see as the "right" side of any issue, without having any idea of what they're talking about.

Every issue and every instance of every issue deserves to be treated on it's own merits, details included. Unfortunately that is not what we get, what we get instead is a jumping to one side or the other, without the thought process necessary to actually choose the "right" side.
 

Spanner Island

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
23,974
If I were trilled at all and I'm not, it would be at the warning against group think and the readiness of the media to jump in on what they see as the "right" side of any issue, without having any idea of what they're talking about.

Every issue and every instance of every issue deserves to be treated on it's own merits, details included. Unfortunately that is not what we get, what we get instead is a jumping to one side or the other, without the thought process necessary to actually choose the "right" side.
I was referring to the OP'er possibly being thrilled or 'delighted' about some aspect of this... although I didn't make that clear.
 

stopdoingstuff

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
22,399
The interesting part about that whole case, other than the sheer madness of it all, is the total lack of meaningful journalistic or editorial standards surrounding it. It was really just a case of "I'll buy that- no need to check anything at all".
 

Prester Jim

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
9,977
I see no reason why it should be Zoo'd. It meets all the criteria for an OP (link with brief summary, expresses an opinion & it's written in such a way to facilitate discussion), and it's in the correct forum.

Given the above would you care to expand on why it should be in the Zoo?
Just mocking the OPer because he seems to do nothing but call for the zoo for perfectly fine OPs that he happens to disagree with politically.
 

Prester Jim

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 3, 2009
Messages
9,977
The typical "liberal" answer to everything they don't like.

If there's an issue, address it, if not, shut up and move on.
By calling zoo I was mocking the OPer for behaving exactly the way you alleged "liberals" behave.
How ironic.
:rolleyes:
 

Betson

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 7, 2013
Messages
16,705
The interesting part about that whole case, other than the sheer madness of it all, is the total lack of meaningful journalistic or editorial standards surrounding it. It was really just a case of "I'll buy that- no need to check anything at all".
I remember when the story first broke it was a chap who used to work with Rolling stone busted it within a few hours just by doing a bit of research on the internet , he said he checked it because he knew the journalist had form for making up these kinds of stories and he said the editorial staff would have known that so as well but may of them would share her agenda.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top