Supplemental: The Times smooths the way for Rolling Stone!

MONDAY, APRIL 6, 2015

The guild supporting the guild:
At 8 PM on Easter Sunday, under cover of darkness and Opening Day, Rolling Stone released the official report on its journalistic debacle concerning UVA.

The 13,000-word report was prepared by three well-known figures at the Columbia School of Journalism, a major insider entity. For better or worse, this official report was composed deep within the guild.

In some ways, we think the CSJ report is soft on Rolling Stone. But good God! Consider the way the New York Times reported this topic in this morning’s editions.

Ravi Somaiya wrote the 1400-word, front-page report. Unless we’re hallucinating a tad, he seemed intent on keeping readers from grasping the size of this journalistic debacle.

Let’s start with a quick bit of background:

You don’t understand the size of Rolling Stone’s journalistic debacle unless you understand a key point. Hanna Rosen comes close to stating this basic point in her own report at Slate:

“In late March, the Charlottesville, Virginia, police, after a four-month investigation, concluded there was no basis to support Jackie’s account as told in Rolling Stone. It’s pretty clear at this point that Jackie made it up.”

“It’s pretty clear at this point that Jackie made it up!” Speaking more clearly, it’s pretty clear that no attack of the type she described actually happened that night.

Over time, Jackie made a wide array of statements which turned out to be false. Over time, she also made a wide array of contradictory claims.

As a journalistic matter, there’s no obvious reason to believe that Jackie was attacked that night at all. But it seems quite clear that she wasn’t attacked in anything dimly resembling the way described in Rolling Stone.

In truth, there’s no reason to believe any of the claims which appeared in Rolling Stone! There’s no reason to believe that any misconduct occurred on the night in question in the fraternity house which was named in the piece.

There’s no way of knowing why Jackie said the various things she has said in the past several years. But there’s no reason to believe that any of the specific claims in Rolling Stone were actually true—and it seems abundantly clear that many of the claims in the piece were flatly false.

“It’s pretty clear at this point that Jackie made it up.” Three of her friends—real-time eyewitnesses—denied a wide array of Jackie’s statements and claims. During that four-month investigation, local police debunked other claims she had advanced.

Nothing she said was shown to be true. A great deal she said was shown to be false. If you read today’s New York Times, we don’t think you were told that.

This is just one puzzling event, of course. It tells us nothing about the rate of sexual assault on the nation’s campuses.

But you don’t understand the size of Rolling Stone’s journalistic debacle until you understand that key fact. It’s pretty clear that Jackie invented the key events in the story Rolling Stone told.

“It’s pretty clear at this point that Jackie made it up.” It’s also clear that Rolling Stone simply ran with Jackie’s story, failing to perform the most basic fact-checking procedures.

The journalistic malfeasance here rises to the level of crazy. Unless you read the front page of today’s New York Times, where Somaiya starts his report like this:
SOMAIYA (4/6/15): Rolling Stone magazine retracted its article about a brutal gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity, after the release of a report on Sunday that concluded the widely discredited piece was the result of failures at every stage of the process.

The report, published by the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism and commissioned by Rolling Stone, said the magazine failed to engage in ''basic, even routine journalistic practice'' to verify details of the ordeal that the magazine's source, identified only as Jackie, described to the article's author, Sabrina Rubin Erdely.

On Sunday, Ms. Erdely, in her first extensive comments since the article was cast into doubt, apologized to Rolling Stone's readers, her colleagues and ''any victims of sexual assault who may feel fearful as a result of my article.''

In an interview discussing Columbia's findings, Jann S. Wenner, the publisher of Rolling Stone, acknowledged the piece's flaws but said that it represented an isolated and unusual episode and that Ms. Erdely would continue to write for the magazine. The problems with the article started with its source, Mr. Wenner said. He described her as ''a really expert fabulist storyteller"...
That’s the text which appears on the Times’ front page, before the report jumps to page B4. Let’s try to understand what a reader might take from that description.

From that account, a reader might get the impression that “a brutal gang rape” really did occur at the fraternity in question that night.

In reality, there’s no reason to believe any such thing. The evidence seems to show that no event occurred at the fraternity that night at all.

From that account, a reader might get the impression that “the magazine’s source” really did undergo an “ordeal” that night, with Rolling Stone merely “failing to verify details of the ordeal.”

A reader might get the further impression that Erdely’s piece has only been “cast into doubt.”

She failed to verify details! A reader might think that the failure to verify details constitutes the “flaws” in the piece which Wenner has now acknowledged. Under this interpretation, Rolling Stone and the CSJ are high-mindedly applying the highest possible journalistic standards to a report which only got “details” wrong.

That would be a crazily inaccurate understanding of this journalistic debacle. But at least one reader came away from Somaiya’s report with that understanding.

He posted this comment last night in response to other commenters who were condemning Jackie and Rolling Stone. His understanding makes perfect sense, given Somaiya’s account:
COMMENTER FROM WESTCHESTER (4/5/15): I'm sorry, but what I read here is that neither the police or Rolling Stone or Columbia were able to conclusively prove that a rape happened, I'm not sure the conclusion that no rape occurred flows from that finding. Rolling Stone and Ms. Erdely were journalistically irresponsible and unethical, and the police could not deliver a triable case to the D.A. But I'm not as willing to say that something very bad didn't happen to Jackie, despite the inconsistencies in her story of an extremely traumatic physical and psychological brutalization.
“The police could not deliver a triable case to the DA?” They “weren’t able to conclusively prove that a rape happened?”

This reader has a seriously flawed understanding of the facts of this case, in which the police showed that Jackie had made a wide array of statements which were demonstrably false. But then, all through his report, Somaiya seems to go out of his way to keep readers from grasping the depth of the flaws with Jackie’s claims, and the corresponding size of Rolling Stone’s journalistic misfeasance.

We’d have to say that Jonathan Mahler works along similar lines in his “news analysis” of the CSJ report in this morning’s Times. Beyond that, we’d have to say that CSJ also uses some rather soft soap in certain parts of its report.

At one point after another, Somaiya seems to disguise the extent to which the Rolling Stone story broke down. Beyond that, he weirdly edits Erdely’s statement of apology, in a way which seems rather hard to explain.

(More on that tomorrow.)

To our eye, Somaiya and Mahler were working with some very soft soap in their pieces today. Then too, we have the rather strange decision by the Times to lead yesterday’s Sunday Review with yet another first-person account of a rape at UVA, this time from 1997.

As if to keep the pogrom going, the Times chips in with another undocumented account which paints UVA as a villain. On the whole, this seems like rather strange journalistic conduct.

Tomorrow, we’ll look at more of Somaiya’s work as he glosses the facts of the case. Before we’re done, we’ll consider the ways Mahler, and the CSJ report itself, were overly kind to the Stone.

For now, we’ll simply pose a question: Is this the guild helping the guild?

If we didn’t know better, we’d think that’s what we were seeing! We’d think we were seeing a lot of soft soap being applied to a huge journalistic mess.

We’d think we were seeing some major insiders looking on the sunniest possible side. We’d think we were seeing the guild mopping up for the guild, putting thumbs on the scale on behalf of embattled colleagues.

We’d also think the Times was using another unverified, unreported story to keep a preferred narrative alive.

Isn’t that the way Rolling Stone created this astonishing mess in the first place? Why would the Times, on this day of all days, head down that same tricky road?

Tomorrow: “Keep on the sunny side!” For the Carter Family version, you should just click here.

66 comments:

  1. Trigger warning for all nitwits who think 1 in 4 women are raped.

    Rolling Stone says "Jackie" should be free of blame in the entire disaster. Rolling Stone has no trouble implicating several innocent men of rape or by association, and journalists in general have no trouble naming accused rapists.

    But Rolling Stone and other publications and media outlets will protect the liars who falsely accuse. Why? Because "rape culture"!

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is what inevitably happens when advocacy journalism falls into the trap of equating its narrative in pursuit of a higher truth with the actual facts of a specific story. The CSJ review does indeed go soft on RS, but perhaps even more disturbing is how the New York Times article refrains from even addressing the failure of RS magazine to hold anybody accountable for committing such a blatant fraud on the public. Would it really have been that hard to contact a J-school professor who teaches an ethics class to point out the irresponsibility of the publication promising to continue working with Erdely? Or the publisher's decision not to fire the editors and so-called fact checkers who let this crap get into print? Apparently, this is just business as usual as far as the guild is concerned. No wonder nobody trusts the media anymore. Whether the ideology is left or right, we all lose when convenient and comforting narratives trump actual evidence in any given case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I find myself wondering if calling Jackie a liar, even by implication, might lead to a lawsuit. It may be that Jackie has a lawyer. Perhaps Erdely will be let go later, out of the spotlight.

      Delete
    2. I find myself wondering if the comment @ 4:43 is one which vividly indicates that for some readers, providing details is immaterial.

      Delete
    3. It isn't a coincidence that so many of the trolls here seem to enjoy puerile word play. I agree that it is probably one troll with too much time of his hands.

      Delete
    4. Or maybe it is Jackie's lawyer, Palma Pustilnik, who is named in the New York Times. He/she may find it amusing that, in addition to one commenter whose sole topic is trolls, Bob Somerby's comment box is filled with people who don't read the actual articles he criticizes.

      Delete
  3. I read that NYT front-page article this morning, in the dead-tree doorstep edition.

    Coming here later, I see that I had exactly the impression Somerby describes: I felt like the NYT seriously soft-pedaled the extent to which Rolling Stone had failed in its journalistic responsibilities.

    I also felt that the NYT article went out of its way to leave the impression that it may have been *no more* than a problem of reporting -- that the events though may well have happened just as described in the now admittedly-flawed reporting.

    When you report that an article "about" a brutal gang rape was retracted, that's the impression you create.

    Given that, it's a second failure if you fail to state, as the NYT does fail to state, that there's really no evidence at all that the supposed brutal gang rape even happened. At all.

    I await the usual crew to inform us that whatever Rolling Stone's failures, whatever Columbia School of Journalism's failures, whatever the failures of The New York Times, the worse problem, surely, is Bob Somerby drawing attention to it in his idiosyncratic way.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The New York Times has no credibility and no one should put stock in anything its staff reports or opines about. I will add that this conclusion would likely have eluded me for longer or forever had I never visited this blog. Thanks Bob.

      Delete
    2. I look forward to reminding you of this comment when "Bob" uses the NY Times as his source for facts when the Times report fits his narrative, as is often the case.

      Unfortunately, since we are both anonymous I may have trouble calling your attention to it. When I do mae such a reminder, can I call you "Jackie?"

      Delete
    3. It is a mistake to take his post as "never read or trust or cite the NY Times. He is urging critical thinking. There are no perfect sources.

      Delete
    4. Well obviously he suggested just that. Or else his writing is so *fuzzy* that @ 5:04 takes that as his message. * But blaming Bob is the wrong lesson to take.*

      Delete
    5. The trolls (or, if they prefer, the idiots) can be relied upon to miss (or attempt to mischaracterize) the point.

      They either pretend to think (or are stupid enough to think) that the question here is whether or not "the NY Times as a source for facts" is what has been in question.

      Since it would be hard to invent such inanity, we must thank them for showing us that it exists nevertheless.

      7:00 PM's post is a case in point. Somerby "obviously" suggested that one should "never read or trust or cite the NY Times." This is obvious, apparently, because some idiot/troll previously implied it. There's no necessity of showing it in Somerby's text, at least not for idiots/trolls.

      Delete
  4. "But blaming Jackie is the wrong lesson to take."

    In fact, blaming Jackie is without question the most RIGHT "lesson to take," followed by blaming RS. But such is the mentality of a progressive left that has gone off the deep end.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Glad Somerby alluded to Steinbeck in today's first post. Because his novelizing today had a certainly Steinbeck flair.

    "under cover of darkness and Opening Day, Rolling Stone released..."

    Kino awoke in the near dark.

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Is this the guild helping the guild?," asks a conspiratorial blogger, noting that the report on the Rolling Stone's false report of a rape was conducted by "a major insider entity."

    I'd certainly think so too if I had not noticed how Bob disappears the word "failure" which appears in both headlines of the NY Times coverage and if I hadn't read the coverage in another guild member institution which, while yet to appear in Bob's work, managed to do much to debunk the story in the first place.

    Let's see if I can find a link with an example since Bob does not:

    Ah, yes, here is one of many:

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2015/04/05/columbia-journalism-school-report-blasts-rolling-stone/

    ReplyDelete
  7. Jackie lied, journalism died.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No big deal. No one will notice since intellectual culture is melting.

      Delete
  8. Here's a little PR trick Somerby is obviously unaware of.

    Sunday is generally a very slow news day, with news staffs working with skeleton crews. This is particularly true on Easter Sunday, when the "top story" an Easter egg hunt in a local park.

    If you want to enhance the odds of your story hitting Page One, release it on Sunday. They are starved for news.

    If you want to enhance the odds of your story getting buried or ignored, release it on Friday afternoon, when reporters are worn out from the week behind them and readers got lots to do on Saturday morning.

    In other words, you'd think a sharp and savvy new critic of so many years would know what every newsroom in America knows about timing the release of your story to get the desired result you want.

    But nope, Somerby actually sees a deep dark conspiracy in Rolling Stone releasing this on Easter Sunday.

    Well, guess what Bob? IT WAS ON EVERY FRONT PAGE IN AMERICA this morning including here in flyover country.

    Plus it was covered on every national Web site, and every national blog, and twittered and shared until kingdom come.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You think Easter Sunday is just another Sunday?

      Delete
    2. Not when it is also Opening Day, which in Somerby's post he made the equivalent of the religious event celebrated on the same weekend day in question.

      Delete
    3. No, I don't think Easter Sunday is "just another Sunday." It is even a slower news day than most Sundays.

      Contrary to Bob's assertion, if I wanted to put a story on every front page in America, I'd release it on Easter Sunday.

      Delete
    4. It doesn't matter how much news there is if people are too busy to read the paper.

      Delete
    5. People may be too busy on Easter Sunday to read the paper. I doubt they were too busy on Easter Monday.

      And I am still wondering what planet Somerby is living on if he truly believes this story was soft-pedaled and buried.

      I do know what planet his loyal fans live on, where they believe everything Somerby says, no matter how ridiculous and disconnected it is from reality.

      As other have noted, Bob took a story that was quickly discredited last fall by the Washington Post, was studied and further blasted by the Columbia School of Journalism, was reported and continues to be reported and discussed widely by every newspaper, TV news show, talk shows, and Web sites.

      And he bends all that into yet one more example of his favorite narrative of "the guild protected one of its own."

      Well, Bob has proven one thing. There is nothing that an ideologue can't bend into the story he wants to tell.


      Delete
    6. It was soft-pedaled. Most of us reading it agree about that. Few people read Sunday's paper on Monday. They read Monday's paper.

      It is still worth asking why no one was fired over this. How badly can journalists screw up and still keep their jobs? Clearly they are being protected. I doubt it is out of concern for their lives, so what else is being protected by pretending this was no big deal? This isn't just Somerby's imagination.

      Delete
    7. "I do know ...," you know less than you think you do. But it sure does make it easy to win arguments against a group of people that only exists in your excitable mind.

      Oh, by the way, here's what's soft: on a story that was not verified at all, was sensational, and brought disrepute to a major publication,no one lost their job.

      Delete
    8. Here's what I can't square. Way back in January 2014, Bob was crying big tears and talking about what a horrible person Rachel Maddow was because she wanted Gov. UItrasound to be indicted for the "not so heinous" crime of taking bribes.

      Now Bob and his sheep want people to lose their jobs, not just for this story, but also for the crime of telling people that free and reduced school lunches were a "rough proxy" for measuring poverty.

      Here's another thing that will come as a shock to you. You can't tell Rolling Stone how to run its business. You can not like the way they do so, and choose not to patronize their magazine.

      But it seems to me that the brass at Rolling Stone felt the rather public humiliation was punishment enough. Again, you are free to disagree and react accordingly.

      What you can't do, however, is morph Rolling Stone's decision in this case into an industry-wide protection racket, when history, recent and otherwise, has demonstrated time and again that reporters and editors have lost their jobs over far less.

      Delete
    9. Speaking of lies and protection and fairy tales . . .

      Does it also apply to Bill O'Reilly? He seems to be doing quite nicely while Brian Williams is serving a rather lengthy suspension.

      Or how about Sean Hannity when he tried to turn Clive Bundy into a freedom fighter? That was a nice little fairy tale for a certain segment of the public, wasn't it?

      Bob might have a better blog if he'd look at all the "fairy tales" across the political spectrum that worm their way into news cycles. Come to think of it, a long time ago, that's exactly what he did.

      Instead, we get long series about Meredith Vieira's house based on a Parade magazine profile.

      And now that the right-wing talking points are in, we'll get another series in how the Indiana "businesses are religious, too" law wasn't so bad after all.




      Delete
    10. "It was soft-pedaled. Most of us reading it agree about that. Few people read Sunday's paper on Monday. They read Monday's paper." Anonymous @ 10:33

      No, most people do not. You and Bob do, presuming you are not Bob. If you are not Bob we apologize because that means you are probably one of the analysts and most people do know how easy it is to make you people cry.

      For what it's worth, as a wannabe warrior in the battle against the soft pedaling guild, you should read Lt. Commander Somerby's geometric logic a little more carefully. We have taken the liberty of highlighting a portion relevant to your assertion about who reads what and when.

      "The journalistic malfeasance here rises to the level of crazy. Unless you read the front page of today’s New York Times, where Somaiya starts his report like this:" Lt. Commander Bob Somerby

      "Today's" means Monday.

      Delete
    11. I think Bob takes for granted that we already appreciate the fact that conservative outlets employ tribally pleasing tales.

      Delete
    12. Then DavidinCal is at the wrong website.

      Delete
  9. Duke Lacrosse rape fake. Lena Dunham rape fake. Rolling Stone rape fake. Trayvon murder fake. Mike Brown murder fake. The rampant rape and racism culture libs crave doesn't exist so they must invent their idea of fairy tales.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 100,000 dead Iraqis and over 2 million Iraqi refugees.
      Hey, 9;08 PM, GFY.

      Delete
    2. Trayvon murder fake? No, stalking perp with gun walks.

      Delete
    3. The story told by Crump about Trayvon was false. His killing was real. Using the word "murder" to describe it is false.

      Delete
    4. Tell that to the prosecutors who brought a murder charge.

      And before you hold up the jury's finding of not guilty in the case keep in mind 99% of us know innocent people are convicted and guilty parties acquitted in our criminal justice system.

      Delete
    5. Prosecutors bringing charges proves the charge. HAHAHAHA. Behold today's progressive.

      Delete
    6. No one said the Republican prosecutor appointed by the Republican governor who brought murder charges against George Zimmerman proved the charges beyond a reasonable doubt to the jury.

      Behold an example of a "dumb, lazy, and dishonest" conservative.

      Some say Bob Somerby ignores such folks and counsels "his" liberal tribe to coddle them in their communication.

      Delete
  10. Maybe the reason for the soft-pedaled coverage wasn't so much to protect other journalists as to preserve the chosen liberal narrative.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "From that account, a reader might get the impression that “a brutal gang rape” really did occur at the fraternity in question that night."

      Really? From the kind of reader who doesn't understand words like the"widely discredited piece was the result of failures at every stage of the process"?

      Delete
    2. Jackie was discredited, not just the piece.

      Delete
    3. And yet, in their apology, Rolling Stone referred to the "rape", rather than the "alleged rape". They kept the real name of "Jackie" secret, just as if she were a victim, rather than the perpetrator of slanderous lies. And, the list of those they specifically apologized to didn't include Phi Kappa Psi and its members. A person reading this apology might well conclude that the fraternity did harm "Jackie" in some way, even if the written account isn't necessarily fully accurate.

      Delete
    4. Maybe the reason for the half baked comments of David in Cal isn't so much to project his addled views, but because he simply doesn't read thoroughly:

      Rolling Stone:

      "We would like to apologize to our readers and to all of those who were damaged by our story and the ensuing fallout, including members of the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity and UVA administrators and students.

      Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/a-rape-on-campus-what-went-wrong-20150405#ixzz3WdTsv3fS
      Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

      Delete
    5. David in Cal, great points.

      Delete
    6. Great points indeed from David in Cal:

      Point 1: "And yet, in their apology, Rolling Stone referred to the "rape", rather than the "alleged rape".

      Rolling Stone:

      "A NOTE FROM THE EDITOR: Last November, we published a story, 'A Rape on Campus' [RS 1223], that centered around a University of Virginia student's horrifying account of her alleged gang rape at a campus fraternity house."

      Point 2: "They kept the real name of "Jackie" secret,"

      Win one for the DinCster.

      Point 3: "And, the list of those they specifically apologized to didn't include Phi Kappa Psi and its members."

      See the comment posted twenty minutes and immediately above the salute to the great points of David in Cal.

      Point 4: "A person reading this apology might well conclude that the fraternity did harm "Jackie" in some way."

      I can only conclude that neither David in Cal or Anonymous @ 11:26 did not actually read the apology. Since they did not, it is impossible to conclude what other people who did read the apology and are as stupid as these two might conclude. However, given that one idiot here called Monday's New York Times the "Sunday" paper, anything is possible.

      Statistical conclusion: David in Cal made one true point, one possibly accurate observation about stupidity based on a hunch, and two wrong points. Not bad for the gang in Bobland.

      Delete
  11. So in the mind of Bob Somerby, stories about campus rape cases constitute "pogroms." Really? Pogroms?

    He even goes so far as to call a recent op-ed piece by a person whose 1997 case involved an indictment and criminal trial for rape and a formal university proceeding "an undocumented case" that is part of that "pogrom." Who are the modern day "Jews" who are the victims of this "pogrom?" What part of an indictment and trial is "undocumented?"

    Sorry Somerby fans. Your blogger friend might seem like a real bright fellow to you. But to me he sounds like a male who is off the rocker he needs to be carefully placed back upon.

    ReplyDelete
  12. How I Get My Husband Back With The Help Of Dr Brave

    An amazing testimony on a spell caster who brought my husband back to me. My name is Natasha Johnson,i live in Florida,USA,and I'm happily married to a lovely and caring husband ,with three kids. A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my husband .so terrible that he took the case to court for a divorce.he said that he never wanted to stay with me again,and that he didn't love me anymore.So he packed out of the house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get him back,after much begging,but all to no avail.and he confirmed it that he has made his decision,and he never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my husband .So i explained every thing to him,so he told me that the only way i can get my husband back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for him too.So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow his advice. Then he gave me the email address of the spell caster whom he visited.{bravespellcaster@gmail.com}. So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address he gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my husband back the next day.What an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my husband who didn't call me for the past seven {7}months,gave me a call to inform me that he was coming back.So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster. So, i will advice you out there to kindly visit the same website { http://enchantedscents.tripod.com/lovespell/},if you are in any condition like this,or you have any problem related to "bringing your ex back. So thanks to the Dr Brave for bringing back my husband ,and brought great joy to my family once again. { bravespellcaster@gmail.com }, Thanks..

    Sent from my MetroPCS 4G Wireless Phone

    ReplyDelete
  13. few month ago i just had my second daughter Haley so cute,about 4 week later i noticed my husband started acting strange, name it he does all sorts of mean stuffs,inconsiderate, unreasonable among other things,few weeks later he told me he his moving out to be with another woman i cried and begged him for several hours,but no he left me with our 2 beautiful daughters.
    he changed his cell number i wouldn't bother him ,Just when i was about to give up a friend told me about this spell caster he had met through someone and helped her on success related issues, she begged me to try out and me i am a very stubborn person and i don't even believe in those stuffs.but today with my husband right by my side i want the world to know about Dr Sorodayo,he helped me bring my husband back just after 2 days i contacted him ,if you are having any kind of issues with your partner just contact him on drsorodayo@yahoo.com or +2349033262493..here is my personal email if you have any questions sashaanderson620@yahoo.com...

    ReplyDelete
  14. I think we have to allow that some of the sensitivity being shown Jackie is appropriate in that, at one level or another, She is simply out of her mind. Like hard core publicity degenerate Monica Lewinski (who's six figure habit is fed mostly by "liberals") she is, not very far beneath the surface, bonkers. Rosanne, The Duke LaCrosse "victim", Lara Logan, some of us just can't get enough.
    I would also speculate the Rolling Stone thought a lot of it's sloppy reporting was O.K. since they were using fake names for the bad guys.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes. "Out of her mind." "Bonkers." "Publicity degenerate."

      Mo'ne, Malala, Mandela, King, and all of the "great souls" are weeping.

      Delete
    2. Yes, and lets just ignore all the harm someone like Jackie does with her storytelling. It makes it that much harder for women who are raped to find justice, for universities to take their claims seriously and for women to participate safely in campus activities, including social activities. But it is Jackie who deserves our concern. Malala, for all her empathy, seemed to have some common sense. You don't.

      Delete
    3. Exactly who is ignoring all the harm "someone like Jackie does with her storytelling"?

      Delete
  15. I would like to defend Bob Somerby against the vicious false charges by trolls brought as part of the rape culture pogrom perpetrated by the far left.

    TDH showed clearly there was at least one of 991 comments, which he quoted at length from the Commenter from Westchester. We all know that Somerby does not read the comments here, so the fact that he found this blatant example buried in the NY Times comment box proves again he goes to incredible lengths to research and justify his critique that the article could have left false impressions because it was instead designed as part of a cover up that is both part of the progressive pogrom and the press culture of defending its own no matter what.

    I agree the Times soft pedaled this story and I won't couch it like Bob in a nice, tongue in cheek "If I didn't know better" way. As another commenter in the Times wrote:

    "Alex Chicago, Illinois 14 hours ago
    WAS THERE REALLY A JACKIE?

    How do we know that Sabrina Rubin Erdely didn’t make up the whole story out of whole cloth? How do we know that Jakie, the so-called rape victim, really existed? Do we take Ms Erdely’s word for it?"

    And as one commenter here at home in TDH correctly noted, even is Jackie does exist, she might have a lawyer so the guild is going for double protection with this piece.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wait a minute! Alex in Chicago read the NY Times story and didn't get the "impression" the Times clearly wanted him to have?

      You mean to say that "we, the people" aren't so dumb after all, and can still think for ourselves?

      Delete
    2. Here's how Jonathan Mahler's soft soap treatment begins:

      "When Rolling Stone took the unusual step of bringing in Steve Coll, the Pulitzer Prize-winning dean of America’s most prestigious journalism school, to dissect its widely discredited article on campus rape, the magazine was clearly making a statement. It was going to get to the bottom of this mess.

      "Rolling Stone now has what it asked for: a thorough indictment of its behavior."

      Delete
  16. "I await the usual crew to inform us that whatever Rolling Stone's failures, whatever Columbia School of Journalism's failures, whatever the failures of The New York Times, the worse problem, surely, is Bob Somerby drawing attention to it in his idiosyncratic way."

    And so it indeed came to pass.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As a representative of "the usual crew" I apologize for our collective failure to respond to your false assertion when it was first made. None of us would characterize posts in TDH as drawing any attention.

      Delete

  17. Yay!! you cannot believe what this spell caster Dr Brave just did for me!!! Was this all a magic?? "This is totally a Easter miracle for me lol" My mouth are short of words. “I got a divorce from my husband when I was six months pregnant with my second child. We had only been married for a short time and had another child who was 1 year old. We had been arguing and quarreling nonstop since the day our first child was conceived, no love nor trust from him anymore so he divorced. And all these whiles, I have been trying all different means to get him back, I also tried some different spell casters from other countries, but none of them could bring Richard back to me. It was only Dr Brave who guaranteed me an urgent 48 hours spell casting, and he assure me that my husband will be with me before Easter day. I am writing to offer my thanks and deep gratitude to you for keeping your promises, and for using your gifted and great powers to bring him back today 2nd of April 2015.. I was thrilled to know that you are specialized in reuniting Lovers. I never thought, in my whole life, that I would be writing to thank someone for casting a love spell on my marriage, but that day has arrived! I have never been happier in my life, and I feel like all of my dreams has turned into reality now. Thank you, Dr Brave , for helping me through the worst times of my life, for being such a great spell caster, and for giving me a love spell that has brought me so much joy. If you doubt his ability, trust me. You should take a chance. It pays off in ways you could never even imagine, Contact him through his website: http://enchantedscents.tripod.com/lovespell/ or his Email: bravespellcaster@gmail.com . thank you so much sir (Mary Owen from UK)

    ReplyDelete
  18. WOW!! This is the most wonderful thing i have ever experience and i need to share this great testimony..I visited a forum here on the internet on the 8TH MATCH 2015, And i saw a marvellous testimony of this powerful and great spell caster called DR MARVEL on the forum..I never believed it, because i never heard nor learnt anything about magic before.. No body would have been able to convince me about magical spells, not until DR MARVEL did a marvellous work for me and restored my marriage of 6 years back to me and brought my spouse back to me in the same 24 hours just as i read on the internet..i was truly flabbergasted and shocked when my husband kneel down begging for forgiveness and for me to accept him back.. I am really short of words and joy, and i don't know how much to convey my appreciation to you DR MARVEL you are a God sent to me and my entire family.. And now i am a joyful woman once again.. here is his website: http://extremespellhome.webs.com. And his email extremespellhome@hotmail.com. His telephone number +1 559 898 2962

    ReplyDelete
  19. WOW!! This is the most wonderful thing i have ever experience and i need to share this great testimony..I visited a forum here on the internet on the 8TH MATCH 2015, And i saw a marvellous testimony of this powerful and great spell caster called DR MARVEL on the forum..I never believed it, because i never heard nor learnt anything about magic before.. No body would have been able to convince me about magical spells, not until DR MARVEL did a marvellous work for me and restored my marriage of 6 years back to me and brought my spouse back to me in the same 24 hours just as i read on the internet..i was truly flabbergasted and shocked when my husband kneel down begging for forgiveness and for me to accept him back.. I am really short of words and joy, and i don't know how much to convey my appreciation to you DR MARVEL you are a God sent to me and my entire family.. And now i am a joyful woman once again.. here is his website: http://extremespellhome.webs.com. And his email extremespellhome@hotmail.com. His telephone number +1 559 898 2962

    ReplyDelete

  20. Need a spell caster?then think of DR,OBEYED he is real reliable and he does what he promise you.I know all this because he helped with my marriage problem.For security reason i will not live my name here but i can tell you all he did to help me.Me and my family live in the US military base here in America,my wife is a solider and i love it that she is and i support.But being a solider means she is half my wife and fully the U.S army.before her three tour we were so in love and we had a kid son who we both love him.It all changed after her two tour in Iraq and Afghanistan,i noticed the distance her second tour she stopped call at first i thought maybe she was part of an accident but i found out that she was OK in Afghanistan.She explained that she always on patrol.It got ugly on the third. I guess in the last two tours she found herself a new lover and then totally forgetting me and our boy.I can not say i did not notice because she always has to be some where instead of with me,coming up with some silly excuse not to be with me that is ( have sex ) and her entire behavior told me all i needed to know. i did my research and i had a hint that it was her squad lieutenant.I had know evidence so a could not take the matter to any body.It killed me to seeing this happen i was going suicidal.What hurt me the most was she going home knowing that i suspect she infidelity,she kept lying to me over and over again.The power of positive thinking helped me a lot.I thought that maybe i can find in the help on the internet with the people who had being in the same problem with him.I found a lot of ways but nor worked except DR,OBEYED spell.At that time five month ago i was so confused that i could do anything to get my wife back so i contacted DR,OBEYED with his email address i saw in some comment on the internet at drobeyedspellcaster@gmail.com.I laid down my problem to him and told him the entire story and he even confirmed my hint was right, how he did i do not know but he was right because my wife told me later after the spell was made effective. DR,OBEYED cast a spell on them both do not know what he did but it seem he made them both forget they ever crossed path romantically speaking like they never know each other expect there official relationship that is squad leader and solider.I owe my life to DR,OBEYED what he did saved my marriage.I can tell you this because i have tried and it worked for me.Your case also have a solution with DR,OEYED contact him with his email: drobeyedspellcaster@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  21. i want to give thanks to my dr and i will always give thanks to DR OGUDUDU who brought back my love that has left me for 6years within 48hours, i have said about this last week but i promised to always tell people about this every week end so that those that did not read about it last week will read about it this week, i have been looking for how to get this boy back to my life because i love this boy with the whole of my heart, i could not replace him with any body,one day i was watching my television when i saw a lady giving thanks to DR OGUDUDU and telling the world how he helped her i was so shocked i could not believe it because i never taught that there are powers that can bring back lost love, then that was how i decided to contact him too because i do really need my love back,when i contacted him i told him everything and he told me not to worry that my love will surely be back to my arms within 48hours at first i could not believe because i was thinking how could somebody that has gone for 6years come back within 48 hours,so then i decided to watch and see,unbelievable within the next 48hours i got a call from unknown number so i decided to pick the call the next thing i could hear was my loves voice he was pleading and begging me on the phone that i should forgive him that i should forget all that have happened that he did not know what came over him,he promised not to leave for any reason, that he was really sorry for what he did,i was so surprised because i never believed that this could happen,so that was how i accepted his apology and the next morning he came to my house and still pleading for me to forgive, him i told him that everything is okay that i have forgiven him, that was how we started again and now we are married, i promised to say this testimony in radio station, commenting this testimony is still okay but before this month runs out i promise to say this in radio station and i will,sir thank you very much.World please am begging you people to try and thank this man for me,or if you need his help here is his email address drogududuspellhome@gmail.com. or call +2348144368825 THANK YOU DR

    ReplyDelete
  22. My name is Sophia from northern Ireland, i am 30 years old, happily married with three kids named Alex,Joy and Jane, i am here majorly to thank
    and share my wonderful testimony with the general public about a great and powerful spell caster called Dr Mighty Owolo who helped me in retrieving back my Family and bringing peace to my life again, this man is not just ordinary his is spiritually bless and work with wisdom.

    He is able to carry out the following due to my confirmation...

    1. Getting your lover or husband back
    2. Spiritual bulletproof
    3. Training
    4. Money spell
    5. Long life spell
    6. Prosperity spell
    7. Protection spell
    8. Get a job spell
    9. Becoming a manager spell
    10. Get a huge loan without paying any fee spell
    11. Getting your scam money back
    12. Child spell

    I need you to give it a try if you are going through any of this issue listed above kindly contact him on this email address (greatowolospellcastingtemple@gmail.com) Via Cell (+2348169207857) Visit him and have a wonderful life thereafter. He is a man of possibilities thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  23. My name is Sophia from northern Ireland, i am 30 years old, happily married with three kids named Alex,Joy and Jane, i am here majorly to thank
    and share my wonderful testimony with the general public about a great and powerful spell caster called Dr Mighty Owolo who helped me in retrieving back my Family and bringing peace to my life again, this man is not just ordinary his is spiritually bless and work with wisdom.

    He is able to carry out the following due to my confirmation...

    1. Getting your lover or husband back
    2. Spiritual bulletproof
    3. Training
    4. Money spell
    5. Long life spell
    6. Prosperity spell
    7. Protection spell
    8. Get a job spell
    9. Becoming a manager spell
    10. Get a huge loan without paying any fee spell
    11. Getting your scam money back
    12. Child spell

    I need you to give it a try if you are going through any of this issue listed above kindly contact him on this email address (greatowolospellcastingtemple@gmail.com) Via Cell (+2348169207857) Visit him and have a wonderful life thereafter. He is a man of possibilities thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  24. How to solve relationship and married problem !!

    I can say am the happiest woman on earth because of what Dr Frank Ojo has done in my life for restoring happiness and love back to my family. My name is Helene Wilson. I'm happily married to a lovely and caring husband with two kids. A very big problem occurred in my family seven months ago,between me and my husband .so terrible that he took the case to court for a divorce.he said that he never wanted to stay with me again,and that he didn't love me anymore.So he packed out of the house and made me and my children passed through severe pain. I tried all my possible means to get him back,after much begging,but all to no avail.and he confirmed it that he has made his decision,and he never wanted to see me again. So on one evening,as i was coming back from work,i met an old friend of mine who asked of my husband .So i explained every thing to him,so he told me that the only way i can get my husband back,is to visit a spell caster,because it has really worked for him too.So i never believed in spell,but i had no other choice,than to follow his advice. Then he gave me the email address of the spell caster whom he visited.{Templeofloveandprosperity@gmail.com}. So the next morning,i sent a mail to the address he gave to me,and the spell caster assured me that i will get my husband back the next day.What an amazing statement!! I never believed,so he spoke with me,and told me everything that i need to do. Then the next morning, So surprisingly, my husband who didn't call me for the past 9 months,gave me a call to inform me that he was coming back.So Amazing!! So that was how he came back that same day,with lots of love and joy,and he apologized for his mistake,and for the pain he caused me and my children. Then from that day,our relationship was now stronger than how it were before,by the help of a spell caster. So, If you have any problem contact him, I give you 100% guarantee that he will help you, Thanks to Dr Frank Ojo for bringing back my husband ,and brought great joy to my family once again, SO HERE HIS EMAIL ADDRESS { Templeofloveandprosperity@gmail.com } WEBSITE ADDRESS : http://lovespell2.yolasite.com, Thanks you Dr Frank Ojo, i Helene will always be testifying about your good work.

    ReplyDelete