1) The document discusses a Rolling Stone article about an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia. The reporter, Sabrina Erdely, failed to properly verify details of the story with additional sources and witnesses. 2) Erdely did not interview the three friends who were with the alleged victim on the night of the rape. She also included inaccurate details about the victim's appearance. 3) The editors at Rolling Stone also failed to properly fact check the story before publication. The article had to be retracted after many inconsistencies came to light.

1. Joe Crain
JRN 318 – Ethics
When writing a story about a rape incident, one has to be extremely careful. You need
to make sure that your subject is willing to participate in the story and if not, there’s a certain
point where you have to walk away. A story that involves a gang rape on campus should be very
detailed with lots of interviews conducted and facts checked. A failure to do so could result in a
lot of embarrassment for yourself, your editor and the publication that you write for.
The Rolling Stone story, “A Rape on Campus”, was about a rape incident at the
University of Virginia. A freshman, Jackie, was supposedly raped at a fraternity party as some
sort of initiation rite. Police attempted to conduct an investigation based on the information in
the Rolling Stone story but they couldn’t find enough evidence to charge anyone.
Sabrina Erdely failed to do a lot of basic journalism things that any reporter should be
able to do. The Columbia School of Journalism said that she failed to speak to the three friends
of Jackie on the night she was raped. Erdely failed to give an accurate description of Jackie’s
appearance and she had inconsistencies in the story. If someone’s memory was hazy and they
can’t remember specific details, you can’t make them up or print what the person thinks they
remember because it could be damaging to others.
Sean Woods, primary editor, and Will Dana, top editor, clearly didn’t do their homework
when it came to making sure that this story was accurate and the pieces of the puzzle were all
in place. The Columbia School of Journalism said that Dana “might have looked more deeply
into the story drafts he read, spotted the reporting gaps and insisted that they be fixed. He did

2. not.” The fact that such simple information wasn’t even included in this story or checked is
mind blowing and a great example of bad journalism.
Rolling Stone decided to retract the story after the publication of it and Dana issued an
apology to readers and the University of Virginia. Basic reporting skills were left at the table
Erdely clearly didn’t do enough reporting. One of Jackie’s friends, Ryan Duffin, said that “A lot
of the article was still based in truth, but the focal point would have been different.” If Erdely
had decided to try harder to verify the information that Jackie gave her then it’s possible that
the story never would’ve caused the controversy that it did.
Even though Jackie was the one that was the rape victim, you can’t just take someone’s
word for it and you have to seek out more information from other people. One thing journalists
can’t do is distort facts or context and I think that’s one of the many flaws that happened with
this story. Greater care wasn’t taken by Erdely or her editors and Rolling Stone’s reputation
paid a price with the publication of this story. Months after the article was published, Dana left
Rolling Stone. It was speculated that one of the reasons was because of this story and Rolling
Stone became the target of many lawsuits because of the falsities littered throughout the
article.