Ethical Challenge 1

The Rolling Stone’s rape case was a huge, sensationalized story about the supposed rape culture in the University of Virginia. That issue of the magazine sold out over the hype of the story broken by Sabrina Erdely about the gang rape of Jackie, who was assaulted in a fraternity house as a freshman. After its release, however, other groups investigated the facts of the case and how it was conducted. It was found that no other sources corroborated many facts in Jackie’s story, and Erdely didn’t get any other sources to talk. The editor still chose to run the story, wholeheartedly believing in the story.

Although the editor says the responsibility lies on Rolling Stone’s as a whole, I’d argue that the fault lies on the editor himself. Will Dana, who issued an apology on the article after the fact, should have attempted to check the story in the first place. He should have asked Erdely how many sources she talked to, how reliable they all were, and other questions to screen the validity of the story, especially with how sensitive and important the story would be.

Despite the sensitive topic of dealing with a rape victim, it’s still the journalist’s responsibility to make sure they’re reporting an unbiased truth. People go to the news for what really happened, not for what one person believes happens. I would have found a way to contact other sources willing to talk about this story to compare their facts of the story to Jackie’s.

One thought on “Ethical Challenge 1

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *