The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
Sabrina Rubin Erdely's Enablers in the Media

With the jury having found Rolling Stone guilty of “actual malice” in UVA bureaucrat Nicole Eramo’s lawsuit against the famous magazine over its broken glass gang rape blood libel, it’s worth looking at how many prominent journalists enthusiastically backed Erdely’s absurd concoction:

Screenshot 2016-11-04 17.22.14

Last summer, historian KC Johnson put up a blog post archiving enthusiastic tweets Sabrina Rubin Erdely received in November 2014 from other professional journalists praising her ludicrous Rolling Stone hate hoax “A Rape on Campus.”

For example, Jeffrey Goldberg praised Erdely’s Night of Broken Glass rape fantasy as “Amazing reporting. And terrifying.”

Goldberg has recently been promoted to editor-in-chief of The Atlantic.

Screenshot 2016-11-04 17.28.49

Jeffrey Toobin, a legal writer for The New Yorker and talking head on CNN, tweeted: “you did amazing work, a real public service.”

Screenshot 2016-11-04 17.31.56

Luke Russert of NBC tweeted this on November 19, 2014.

Screenshot 2016-11-04 17.33.52

Dan Zak is a Washington Post reporter. It wasn’t good enough for him that one fraternity was subject to a Night of Broken Glass mob breaking its windows and all fraternities on campus were shut. He tweeted: “Now burn ‘em down.”

Johnson has collected many more such tweets from professional MSM journalists who went out of their way to praise and promote without a hint of skepticism Erdely’s crazy article.

How much is the Trump Phenomenon of 2016 is driven by parts of the the public slowly becoming aware over the years of how much the big money media loves to promote hate hoaxes targeting them?

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[Filtered by Reply Thread]
  1. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Twenty years ago, it was demonstrated that peer-reviewed scientific journals will jump at nonsense if its wrapped in a strong liberal message. No telling how bad it is now. Journalists are doing the same thing, just with an even lower bar.

    Read More
    • Replies: @snorlax
    To be fair, IIRC Sokal's paper was published in a philosophy journal, if that's what you were referring to. But agreed that even most relatively grounded sciences are full of propaganda, nonsense and censorship. Only the hard (in all senses of the term) sciences (math, physics, CS) are still more scholarship-based than political, and even there it's changing.
    , @backup
    Can you back that up with a link? Very interested.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/sabrina-rubin-erdelys-enablers/#comment-1635978
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.

    Jeffrey Goldberg in particular, I don’t recall him every registering a mea culpa after all of his “weapons of mass destruction” journalism leading up to the Iraq War. BTW, The Atlantic has only a brief squib about the verdict and no room for commentary, there is a “discussions” sub-thread via Disqus but they are in complete denial about the story: they still believe Jackie was raped.

    This is as good a time as any to thank Richard Bradley and Steve Sailer for taking the time to dispassionately take this story apart before Shapiro stepped in and nailed it.

    In particular, I have to thank Steve for providing a decent venue to discuss, not only this preposterous hoax, but other news stories that other sites refuse to either discuss or allow open venting and theorizing about the causes of the madness of our age.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot

    It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.
     
    I was going to say the same thing. It is one thing to be fooled by a hoax, another thing to promote the hoax in the media and twitter and then never take the 11 seconds to tweet an article about the retraction.
    , @Charles Erwin Wilson

    I have to thank Steve for providing a decent venue to discuss... the causes of the madness of our age.
     
    I concur.
    , @Perspective
    "It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all."

    I'm sure the silence from them will be deafening, though enough pressure from people like Steve Sailer and "us" could persuade them to issue a begrudging, mealy mouthed retraction of some sorts.
    , @Connecticut Famer
    Amen!!
  3. This a pretty good example of how the more of an insider you are, the more professional advancement is a matter of getting along with other insiders.

    https://spottedtoad.wordpress.com/2016/11/01/the-castle-and-the-forest-sauvage/

    Read More
    • Replies: @SPMoore8
    There is a huge amount of mutual backscratching in wordsmithing business (as also in the creative arts generally, but calling journalism "art" is silly). Just read the blurbs on any book.
  4. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “Hain’t we got all the fools in town on our side? And hain’t that a big enough majority in any town?”

    This quote from The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn came to mind.

    Read More
  5. Johnson has collected many more such tweets from professional MSM journalists who went out of their way to praise and promote without a hint of skepticism Erdely’s crazy article.

    SKEPTICISM?

    Good lord, Steven. You’d think that “journalists” are in the fact-checking business or sumpin.

    Rather than trying to outwank the next waste of oxygen in displays of fulsome fawning.

    The former is not how one advances a career in the Chattering Classes. The latter is: virtue signalling where the only virtue is sycophancy. Master that, and the university-media-corporate-NGO-political world is your oyster.

    Or clam, if we want to get Olivier-esque:

    Note that your examples are all men (so to speak) lining up to signal enthusiastically that they agree with the prevailing orthodoxy that white males and frats are horrible rape culture cabals. Further they agree with a writer whose prose prior to this piece was lurid at best. A writer who also had just scored a $300K contract with RS alone.

    Read More
  6. @Spotted Toad
    This a pretty good example of how the more of an insider you are, the more professional advancement is a matter of getting along with other insiders.

    https://spottedtoad.wordpress.com/2016/11/01/the-castle-and-the-forest-sauvage/

    There is a huge amount of mutual backscratching in wordsmithing business (as also in the creative arts generally, but calling journalism “art” is silly). Just read the blurbs on any book.

    Read More
  7. @Anonymous
    Twenty years ago, it was demonstrated that peer-reviewed scientific journals will jump at nonsense if its wrapped in a strong liberal message. No telling how bad it is now. Journalists are doing the same thing, just with an even lower bar.

    To be fair, IIRC Sokal’s paper was published in a philosophy journal, if that’s what you were referring to. But agreed that even most relatively grounded sciences are full of propaganda, nonsense and censorship. Only the hard (in all senses of the term) sciences (math, physics, CS) are still more scholarship-based than political, and even there it’s changing.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    Yes, Sokal's paper was published in "Social Text", a journal of "postmodern cultural studies", i.e. a journal dedicated to pretentious, left-wing horsesh*t.

    "Only the hard (in all senses of the term) sciences (math, physics, CS) are still more scholarship-based than political, and even there it’s changing."

    Physics is becoming more overtly political in practice. The monthly APS newsletter is routinely filled with hand-wringing about physics being too white, too male, too straight, etc., and similar sentiments are starting to show up in their monthly magazine Physics Today as well. There is a movement afoot to institute massive "gender-equity" hiring within academic physics departments. And, of course, there is a great deal of semi-official brow-beating regarding the issue of climate change. The sciences are rotting from within.
  8. From the linked piece:

    Steven Ward, the news director at the Clarion-Ledger, hailed Erdely as a “superstar” who exposed “rape culture at UVA.”

    In contrast Nick Griffin was taken to court twice for his efforts to expose a real rape culture. Who, whom.

    Read More
  9. Me against my sister
    Me and my sister against my cousins
    Me and my sister and my cousins against the Other.
    It is not really complicated. We see the Hatfields against the McCoys. What we don’t see is the Hatfields and the McCoys against the Damn Yanks.

    Read More
  10. @SPMoore8
    It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.

    Jeffrey Goldberg in particular, I don't recall him every registering a mea culpa after all of his "weapons of mass destruction" journalism leading up to the Iraq War. BTW, The Atlantic has only a brief squib about the verdict and no room for commentary, there is a "discussions" sub-thread via Disqus but they are in complete denial about the story: they still believe Jackie was raped.

    This is as good a time as any to thank Richard Bradley and Steve Sailer for taking the time to dispassionately take this story apart before Shapiro stepped in and nailed it.

    In particular, I have to thank Steve for providing a decent venue to discuss, not only this preposterous hoax, but other news stories that other sites refuse to either discuss or allow open venting and theorizing about the causes of the madness of our age.

    It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.

    I was going to say the same thing. It is one thing to be fooled by a hoax, another thing to promote the hoax in the media and twitter and then never take the 11 seconds to tweet an article about the retraction.

    Read More
    • Replies: @newrouter
    > then never take the 11 seconds to tweet an article about the retraction.<

    In those circles, breaking from the herd, is a bad career move. Better to remain silent.
  11. ..from professional [sic] MSM journalists who went out of their way to praise and promote without a hint of skepticism Erdely’s crazy article.

    Well, Steve, the article was up to their standards, you see.

    Read More
  12. I’ve been watching with much amusement Steve retweeting all of the two-year-old praise for Rubin’s article.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Harold
    Haha! Thanks for mentioning that for those of us who don’t follow twitter much.
  13. @Flinders Petrie
    I've been watching with much amusement Steve retweeting all of the two-year-old praise for Rubin's article.

    Haha! Thanks for mentioning that for those of us who don’t follow twitter much.

    Read More
  14. Steve,

    What does this story say about the value of newspaper comment sections that now seem to be on the way out?

    I recall that the way UVA hoax really broke was when every journalist was praising the story, anonymous commenters were the only ones raising doubts. When Bradley wrote his blog post it was commenters linking to it in the newspaper comboxes that gave it an audience. Bradley was an obscure journalist writing a blog to fill his time between jobs. I don’t think it would have been widely read if it hadn’t been for you, and newspaper commenters. Every newspaper I read that did a story on the RS article seemed to a have link to Bradley’s blog post in the comment section.

    Without comment sections does the article even get exposed as hoax or just take longer?

    Read More
  15. One conclusion is that these days, those who go into journalism aren’t very bright. Or if they are bright, they don’t exercise their brains in the fulfillment of their journalistic duties: dumb and/or lazy.

    Read More
  16. @Lot

    It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.
     
    I was going to say the same thing. It is one thing to be fooled by a hoax, another thing to promote the hoax in the media and twitter and then never take the 11 seconds to tweet an article about the retraction.

    > then never take the 11 seconds to tweet an article about the retraction.<

    In those circles, breaking from the herd, is a bad career move. Better to remain silent.

    Read More
  17. Sabrina Rubin Erdely and Judith Miller: soul sisters in false reporting. Unlike Miller, I suspect it will be some good time before Erdely is bestowed a Pulitzer Prize!

    BTW Until now I had not realized that Luke Russert is Tim’s son. File this under the maxim that the apple never falls far from the tree.

    Read More
  18. Just look at his crowds.

    How can he not be winning in the polls? There must be Trump supporters who are not responding. “Shy Tories.” We saw this in Brexit under predicting support for the Leave side.

    Read More
    • Replies: @biz

    How can he not be winning in the polls?
     
    You are aware that probably 150 million people will vote in this election, right? If Trump completely fills a basketball arena that is 10,000 people. If he's done that 100 times without a single repeat person, that is still only 10 million people.

    Every political campaign makes the mistake of confusing enthusiasm among the base with having a lock on a majority of votes.
  19. If you wrote a long, detailed (and entirely fictitious) investigative story about how my ex-wife is a complete c#&t who does things just to annoy me, I’d retweet the hell out of it. Why would I bother to verify it?

    Read More
  20. It’s really amazing the number of completely false narratives that shape so many peoples day-to-day thoughts.

    Campus rape culture
    Women working for less pay
    Justice system bias against minorities
    Global Warming
    etc

    Read More
    • Replies: @kihowi
    I hear men think about sex every seven seconds and women are better at multitasking.
    , @interesting
    hand up, don't shoot.
    gentle giant.
    Micheal was out preaching about our savior Jesus Christ the day he was shot.



    it's endless.
  21. @JeremiahJohnbalaya
    It's really amazing the number of completely false narratives that shape so many peoples day-to-day thoughts.

    Campus rape culture
    Women working for less pay
    Justice system bias against minorities
    Global Warming
    etc

    I hear men think about sex every seven seconds and women are better at multitasking.

    Read More
  22. @SPMoore8
    It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.

    Jeffrey Goldberg in particular, I don't recall him every registering a mea culpa after all of his "weapons of mass destruction" journalism leading up to the Iraq War. BTW, The Atlantic has only a brief squib about the verdict and no room for commentary, there is a "discussions" sub-thread via Disqus but they are in complete denial about the story: they still believe Jackie was raped.

    This is as good a time as any to thank Richard Bradley and Steve Sailer for taking the time to dispassionately take this story apart before Shapiro stepped in and nailed it.

    In particular, I have to thank Steve for providing a decent venue to discuss, not only this preposterous hoax, but other news stories that other sites refuse to either discuss or allow open venting and theorizing about the causes of the madness of our age.

    I have to thank Steve for providing a decent venue to discuss… the causes of the madness of our age.

    I concur.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    I likewise concur, but never let us forget and thank RU, this website's proprietor.
  23. It figures Jeffrey “I had never heard of the Zebra Murders” Toobin would be one of Erdely’s enablers.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Percy Gryce
    To be fair, Toobin gives them a very prominent mention in his book on Patty Hearst.
  24. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    So… what really happened with Osama Bin Laden?

    How can we trust anything?

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    He was shot and then buried at sea. It must be true; O says so.

    Alternatively he'd died of natural causes years before.
  25. anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    This is a big deal. Mainly because Rolling Stone persisted in arguing that the article regarding ‘rape culture’ was accurate, even without the sensational rape. And one of the arguments was that none sexual assault complaints resulted in a male student expelled from the university. The fact that nothing happened is evidence that something happened.

    Based on something like the Duke Lacrosse case, I don’t expect many apologies. I found this in a Public Editor column in the Times:

    I found that the past year’s articles generally reported both sides, and that most flaws flowed from journalistic lapses rather than ideological bias.

    This is a curious comment. Or justification.
    But the comments that are the subject of this post all journalists commenting on journalism. “amazing work” … “an extraordinary piece of journalism”
    I’m sure someone, somewhere said it was ‘unbelievably good’.

    It was bizarre that there was a stampede to get out in front of being against rape. The Fraternities suspended themselves, before the University President suspended them. At the same time, there wasn’t much interest in finding the guilty rapists.

    The only new thing is that it is now found by a court as ‘actual malice’. Rolling Stone blames the lying victim, and now the former cheerleading journalists are going to say that they couldn’t really be expected to uncover a hoax when it was perpetrated with ‘actual malice’.

    In other words, no one is going to apologize.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Oleaginous Outrager

    now the former cheerleading journalists are going to say that they couldn’t really be expected to uncover a hoax when it was perpetrated with ‘actual malice’
     
    Yep, that's already the narrative that's been percolating on Twitter, that if "someone really wants to commit fraud", well, those poor little journalists have no defense. It's not like there's any way to get a story except to completely believe a single source. What the hell, you think they can just ask people questions or something? They're not cops!
  26. @Anonymous
    Twenty years ago, it was demonstrated that peer-reviewed scientific journals will jump at nonsense if its wrapped in a strong liberal message. No telling how bad it is now. Journalists are doing the same thing, just with an even lower bar.

    Can you back that up with a link? Very interested.

    Read More
    • Replies: @biz
    I think he's talking about the Sokal Hoax, which did not demonstrate that peer reviewed scientific journals would publish nonsensical trash. However it did demonstrate that peer reviewed sociology journals would publish nonsensical trash
  27. @Charles Erwin Wilson

    I have to thank Steve for providing a decent venue to discuss... the causes of the madness of our age.
     
    I concur.

    I likewise concur, but never let us forget and thank RU, this website’s proprietor.

    Read More
  28. @anon
    This is a big deal. Mainly because Rolling Stone persisted in arguing that the article regarding 'rape culture' was accurate, even without the sensational rape. And one of the arguments was that none sexual assault complaints resulted in a male student expelled from the university. The fact that nothing happened is evidence that something happened.

    Based on something like the Duke Lacrosse case, I don't expect many apologies. I found this in a Public Editor column in the Times:

    I found that the past year’s articles generally reported both sides, and that most flaws flowed from journalistic lapses rather than ideological bias.
     
    This is a curious comment. Or justification.
    But the comments that are the subject of this post all journalists commenting on journalism. "amazing work" ... "an extraordinary piece of journalism"
    I'm sure someone, somewhere said it was 'unbelievably good'.

    It was bizarre that there was a stampede to get out in front of being against rape. The Fraternities suspended themselves, before the University President suspended them. At the same time, there wasn't much interest in finding the guilty rapists.

    The only new thing is that it is now found by a court as 'actual malice'. Rolling Stone blames the lying victim, and now the former cheerleading journalists are going to say that they couldn't really be expected to uncover a hoax when it was perpetrated with 'actual malice'.

    In other words, no one is going to apologize.

    now the former cheerleading journalists are going to say that they couldn’t really be expected to uncover a hoax when it was perpetrated with ‘actual malice’

    Yep, that’s already the narrative that’s been percolating on Twitter, that if “someone really wants to commit fraud”, well, those poor little journalists have no defense. It’s not like there’s any way to get a story except to completely believe a single source. What the hell, you think they can just ask people questions or something? They’re not cops!

    Read More
    • Replies: @Forbes
    And when lapdog media mavens are already primed to be misled because they believed in the existence of the 'campus rape culture' then the intentional deception (fraud) will be effortless.

    Indeed, the lapdog media mavens should be considered unindicted co-conspirators for participating with actual malice as the belief of a 'campus rape culture' is without factual foundation. (Rape on campus/of college-aged females is lower than the national rate of incidence.)

    Belief that something is true doesn't make it true--these reporters bleating out accolades wished the Erdely's story to be true. They found it believable because they already believed in a lie.
    , @Olorin

    Yep, that’s already the narrative that’s been percolating on Twitter, that if “someone really wants to commit fraud”, well, those poor little journalists have no defense.
     
    This is Wennercode for: "We work in and fully support a fully co-opted industry and really don't care, because if you play your cards right on the baize of the powers that be, it's a better gig than retailing, say, small shiny things. Plus the opportunities for smug contempt and sense of superiority for being wicked degenerates are something even Yahweh couldn't have dreamed. Which is why he spent the vast majority of his ten statements of the basic law to proscribing covetousness and greed for what others have. Rather than, say, proscribing the cultivation of hubris. Which, as the Biggest Victims of Ever, we have none of, you understand."
  29. Dynamics of success is one part. Winner takes it all.

    But what’s worrying me more is, that Erdely is such a poor writer, and that this pretty obvious fact did not resonate in the publishing world at all.
    Nothing in her story is dead on. It’s not revealing, but suggestive. Not clearly arguing, but cozying the reader into her – labyrinth of sin. At the basis of Erdely’s piece might lie a category mistake: To think that there’s no diffrence nowadays between public and private.

    This is a fundamental mistake, because the very nature of journalism is that it is something public. This means, it’s about arguments much more, than it is about feelings and the like. There is a useful boundary between the therapeutic realm and the realm of the pubkic discourse. If this boundary is neglected -

    – : Narcissism, self-pity, self-aggrandising, even pure fantasizing, projecting, neglecting and so forth – – all reign over reality.

    I would have loved to read what Tom Wolfe would have made out of Erdely’s – and RS’s – hoax. Unfortunately, he decided to knock out Darwin…(maybe the old man is getting lonely, at the top, cooking up curiosities).

    Read More
  30. @SPMoore8
    It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.

    Jeffrey Goldberg in particular, I don't recall him every registering a mea culpa after all of his "weapons of mass destruction" journalism leading up to the Iraq War. BTW, The Atlantic has only a brief squib about the verdict and no room for commentary, there is a "discussions" sub-thread via Disqus but they are in complete denial about the story: they still believe Jackie was raped.

    This is as good a time as any to thank Richard Bradley and Steve Sailer for taking the time to dispassionately take this story apart before Shapiro stepped in and nailed it.

    In particular, I have to thank Steve for providing a decent venue to discuss, not only this preposterous hoax, but other news stories that other sites refuse to either discuss or allow open venting and theorizing about the causes of the madness of our age.

    “It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.”

    I’m sure the silence from them will be deafening, though enough pressure from people like Steve Sailer and “us” could persuade them to issue a begrudging, mealy mouthed retraction of some sorts.

    Read More
  31. @Anon
    So... what really happened with Osama Bin Laden?

    How can we trust anything?

    He was shot and then buried at sea. It must be true; O says so.

    Alternatively he’d died of natural causes years before.

    Read More
  32. It’s called confirmation bias.

    Why the left is more apt to suffer it is subject I’d like to see discussed further.

    Read More
  33. Come on, Steve, play fair. Wasn’t it the intrepid reporters of the WaPo who exposed the hoax?

    An investigation by The Washington Post showed that aspects of Jackie’s account were not true…

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/jury-finds-reporter-rolling-stone-responsible-for-defaming-u-va-dean-with-gang-rape-story/2016/11/04/aaf407fa-a1e8-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html?tid=pm_pop_b

    Read More
    • Replies: @Danindc
    To answer your question. No, it was Richard Bradley and Steve. Shapiro from Post worked hard but had no real insights.
  34. @snorlax
    To be fair, IIRC Sokal's paper was published in a philosophy journal, if that's what you were referring to. But agreed that even most relatively grounded sciences are full of propaganda, nonsense and censorship. Only the hard (in all senses of the term) sciences (math, physics, CS) are still more scholarship-based than political, and even there it's changing.

    Yes, Sokal’s paper was published in “Social Text”, a journal of “postmodern cultural studies”, i.e. a journal dedicated to pretentious, left-wing horsesh*t.

    “Only the hard (in all senses of the term) sciences (math, physics, CS) are still more scholarship-based than political, and even there it’s changing.”

    Physics is becoming more overtly political in practice. The monthly APS newsletter is routinely filled with hand-wringing about physics being too white, too male, too straight, etc., and similar sentiments are starting to show up in their monthly magazine Physics Today as well. There is a movement afoot to institute massive “gender-equity” hiring within academic physics departments. And, of course, there is a great deal of semi-official brow-beating regarding the issue of climate change. The sciences are rotting from within.

    Read More
    • Replies: @newrouter
    >The sciences are rotting from within.<

    A song for Nov. 9th?

    Kate Bush - Cloudbusting

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pllRW9wETzw
  35. “This is a big deal. Mainly because Rolling Stone persisted in arguing that the article regarding ‘rape culture’ was accurate, even without the sensational rape.”

    Not only is it the case that the crime of rape is “not about sex, but about power”, apparently it doesn’t even have to be “about crime”. Something can have nothing to do with rape, and yet exhibit a fundamental “rape-iness”.

    Read More
  36. When being interviewed, people need to start asking journalists questions, putting them on the defensive. Ask them about their statements, their biases, their assertions. The presumption that journalists are the arbiters of truth needs to be undermined.

    Read More
  37. @backup
    Can you back that up with a link? Very interested.

    I think he’s talking about the Sokal Hoax, which did not demonstrate that peer reviewed scientific journals would publish nonsensical trash. However it did demonstrate that peer reviewed sociology journals would publish nonsensical trash

    Read More
  38. @JohnnyWalker123
    Just look at his crowds.

    How can he not be winning in the polls? There must be Trump supporters who are not responding. "Shy Tories." We saw this in Brexit under predicting support for the Leave side.

    https://twitter.com/DanScavino/status/794691414575562752

    How can he not be winning in the polls?

    You are aware that probably 150 million people will vote in this election, right? If Trump completely fills a basketball arena that is 10,000 people. If he’s done that 100 times without a single repeat person, that is still only 10 million people.

    Every political campaign makes the mistake of confusing enthusiasm among the base with having a lock on a majority of votes.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Percy Gryce
    Trump has the enthusiasm. But I still fear that he didn't build an organization to win:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/anti-islamophobia-kills-again/#comment-1451112
  39. How much is the Trump Phenomenon of 2016 is driven by parts of the the public slowly becoming aware over the years of how much the big money media loves to promote hate hoaxes targeting them?

    Are “big money” the new “Scotch-Irish”?

    Read More
  40. @SPMoore8
    It will be interesting to see how all of these authors respond to the verdict, if they bother to say anything about it at all.

    Jeffrey Goldberg in particular, I don't recall him every registering a mea culpa after all of his "weapons of mass destruction" journalism leading up to the Iraq War. BTW, The Atlantic has only a brief squib about the verdict and no room for commentary, there is a "discussions" sub-thread via Disqus but they are in complete denial about the story: they still believe Jackie was raped.

    This is as good a time as any to thank Richard Bradley and Steve Sailer for taking the time to dispassionately take this story apart before Shapiro stepped in and nailed it.

    In particular, I have to thank Steve for providing a decent venue to discuss, not only this preposterous hoax, but other news stories that other sites refuse to either discuss or allow open venting and theorizing about the causes of the madness of our age.

    Amen!!

    Read More
  41. This verdict is no more relevant than finding out that a sick man touched by a healing preacher had died. Modern Liberalism is a religion. And The Truth does not change. The sick man died but that does not mean you cannot be healed by faith. Haven Monahan did not exist but that doesn’t mean someone exactly like him doesn’t exist. That is Faith. The statements by the other reporters are not embarrassing to them. They prove adherence to orthodoxy to the faithful.

    Read More
  42. @Oleaginous Outrager

    now the former cheerleading journalists are going to say that they couldn’t really be expected to uncover a hoax when it was perpetrated with ‘actual malice’
     
    Yep, that's already the narrative that's been percolating on Twitter, that if "someone really wants to commit fraud", well, those poor little journalists have no defense. It's not like there's any way to get a story except to completely believe a single source. What the hell, you think they can just ask people questions or something? They're not cops!

    And when lapdog media mavens are already primed to be misled because they believed in the existence of the ‘campus rape culture’ then the intentional deception (fraud) will be effortless.

    Indeed, the lapdog media mavens should be considered unindicted co-conspirators for participating with actual malice as the belief of a ‘campus rape culture’ is without factual foundation. (Rape on campus/of college-aged females is lower than the national rate of incidence.)

    Belief that something is true doesn’t make it true–these reporters bleating out accolades wished the Erdely’s story to be true. They found it believable because they already believed in a lie.

    Read More
  43. @Oleaginous Outrager

    now the former cheerleading journalists are going to say that they couldn’t really be expected to uncover a hoax when it was perpetrated with ‘actual malice’
     
    Yep, that's already the narrative that's been percolating on Twitter, that if "someone really wants to commit fraud", well, those poor little journalists have no defense. It's not like there's any way to get a story except to completely believe a single source. What the hell, you think they can just ask people questions or something? They're not cops!

    Yep, that’s already the narrative that’s been percolating on Twitter, that if “someone really wants to commit fraud”, well, those poor little journalists have no defense.

    This is Wennercode for: “We work in and fully support a fully co-opted industry and really don’t care, because if you play your cards right on the baize of the powers that be, it’s a better gig than retailing, say, small shiny things. Plus the opportunities for smug contempt and sense of superiority for being wicked degenerates are something even Yahweh couldn’t have dreamed. Which is why he spent the vast majority of his ten statements of the basic law to proscribing covetousness and greed for what others have. Rather than, say, proscribing the cultivation of hubris. Which, as the Biggest Victims of Ever, we have none of, you understand.”

    Read More
  44. @Henry's Cat
    Come on, Steve, play fair. Wasn't it the intrepid reporters of the WaPo who exposed the hoax?

    An investigation by The Washington Post showed that aspects of Jackie’s account were not true...
     
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/jury-finds-reporter-rolling-stone-responsible-for-defaming-u-va-dean-with-gang-rape-story/2016/11/04/aaf407fa-a1e8-11e6-a44d-cc2898cfab06_story.html?tid=pm_pop_b

    To answer your question. No, it was Richard Bradley and Steve. Shapiro from Post worked hard but had no real insights.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Henry's Cat
    You mean this Shapiro fellow was working independently of Bradley/Sailer?
  45. @JeremiahJohnbalaya
    It's really amazing the number of completely false narratives that shape so many peoples day-to-day thoughts.

    Campus rape culture
    Women working for less pay
    Justice system bias against minorities
    Global Warming
    etc

    hand up, don’t shoot.
    gentle giant.
    Micheal was out preaching about our savior Jesus Christ the day he was shot.

    it’s endless.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Peripatetic commenter

    Micheal was out preaching about our savior Jesus Christ the day he was shot.
     
    I think that should be: Michael was out preaching about our savior Barack Obama the day he was heinously executed by a racist cop.
  46. @interesting
    hand up, don't shoot.
    gentle giant.
    Micheal was out preaching about our savior Jesus Christ the day he was shot.



    it's endless.

    Micheal was out preaching about our savior Jesus Christ the day he was shot.

    I think that should be: Michael was out preaching about our savior Barack Obama the day he was heinously executed by a racist cop.

    Read More
  47. @Danindc
    To answer your question. No, it was Richard Bradley and Steve. Shapiro from Post worked hard but had no real insights.

    You mean this Shapiro fellow was working independently of Bradley/Sailer?

    Read More
  48. How much is the Trump Phenomenon of 2016 is driven by parts of the the public slowly becoming aware over the years of how much the big money media loves to promote hate hoaxes targeting them?

    In that last pic of the frat house, the ‘IMP 21′ almost looks like ‘TRUMP 2016′. So you can both literally and figuratively see the beginnings of his popularity.

    Read More
  49. @Mr. Anon
    Yes, Sokal's paper was published in "Social Text", a journal of "postmodern cultural studies", i.e. a journal dedicated to pretentious, left-wing horsesh*t.

    "Only the hard (in all senses of the term) sciences (math, physics, CS) are still more scholarship-based than political, and even there it’s changing."

    Physics is becoming more overtly political in practice. The monthly APS newsletter is routinely filled with hand-wringing about physics being too white, too male, too straight, etc., and similar sentiments are starting to show up in their monthly magazine Physics Today as well. There is a movement afoot to institute massive "gender-equity" hiring within academic physics departments. And, of course, there is a great deal of semi-official brow-beating regarding the issue of climate change. The sciences are rotting from within.

    >The sciences are rotting from within.<

    A song for Nov. 9th?

    Kate Bush – Cloudbusting

    Read More
  50. Female rape hoaxes at universities support persecution hysteria surrounding establishment Political Correctness, the government protected class culture in the US and Israel.

    There is no larger a group of government protected class people than women, and feminist are disposed to persecution hoax hysteria, along with their likeminded friends militant queers.

    Not coincidentally, queers are a government protected class too.

    Read More
  51. @David In TN
    It figures Jeffrey "I had never heard of the Zebra Murders" Toobin would be one of Erdely's enablers.

    To be fair, Toobin gives them a very prominent mention in his book on Patty Hearst.

    Read More
    • Replies: @David In TN
    True, he does give some detail. But how does a man 56 years old, a former federal prosecutor, presumably well read, and a supposed expert on crime and trials, say he had never heard of the Zebra Murders?

    In several interviews Toobin said something like "I knew of the Zodiac killer but had never heard of the Zebra murders until researching the Patty Hearst book."
  52. @biz

    How can he not be winning in the polls?
     
    You are aware that probably 150 million people will vote in this election, right? If Trump completely fills a basketball arena that is 10,000 people. If he's done that 100 times without a single repeat person, that is still only 10 million people.

    Every political campaign makes the mistake of confusing enthusiasm among the base with having a lock on a majority of votes.

    Trump has the enthusiasm. But I still fear that he didn’t build an organization to win:

    http://www.unz.com/isteve/anti-islamophobia-kills-again/#comment-1451112

    Read More
  53. @Percy Gryce
    To be fair, Toobin gives them a very prominent mention in his book on Patty Hearst.

    True, he does give some detail. But how does a man 56 years old, a former federal prosecutor, presumably well read, and a supposed expert on crime and trials, say he had never heard of the Zebra Murders?

    In several interviews Toobin said something like “I knew of the Zodiac killer but had never heard of the Zebra murders until researching the Patty Hearst book.”

    Read More
  54. For all their talk of questioning authority, Jews and the left in general have a hive mind that puts the Borg to shame.

    Read More
  55. Excellent reporting & fine investigation.
    Send Goldberg a copy, please.
    He deserves to read his own crap after it’s been exposed as such.

    Worst part of all this is when there’s a real case it’ll get quickly discredited.
    So much for feminism, when like Hillary, it’s lean on truth & brandished for ones own self aggrandizement.

    Read More

Comments are closed.

PastClassics
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The sources of America’s immigration problems—and a possible solution