With Rolling Stone gaffe, questions of truth

If your mother says she loves you, confirm it with another source.

When it doubt, leave it out. Seek truth.

Editors and professors have pounded adages like these into the heads of reporters for decades, but they gain renewed relevance during times of high-profile journalistic flubs — like the now-infamous Rolling Stone article on campus rape published in November.

With an independent review revealing journalistic lapses, the publication last week apologized and retracted the article cataloging one University of Virginia student's account of being gang raped at a fraternity.

Analysts fear the fallout could affect both journalists and victims of sexual assault.

Credibility, or lack thereof, is the issue.

'The biggest harm done is to students who are assaulted and now feel they won't be believed and won't bring their stories forward,' said Lori Blachford, chair of magazine journalism at the Drake School of Journalism and Mass Communication in Des Moines. 'Journalism might suffer, but not as much as victims of sexual assault.'

University of Iowa and Iowa State University officials say it's too soon to know how the discredited story might affect the willingness of victims to report the crime.

But in journalism classes across the state, the Rolling Stone gaffe has been reverberating for months. Professors have used it as a teaching moment and their students have taken it to heart, Blachford said.

'They take it personally,' she said. 'They want to be believed when they go out and do their work.'

'Ask the hard questions'

When Rolling Stone first published 'A Rape on Campus,' Blachford said, 'I believed it.'

'A lot of people believed it,' she said. 'It was Rolling Stone, for God's sake.'

So when it unraveled, Blachford said, it provided a shocking reminder of the importance of scrupulous reporting.

'If journalism has lost its weight as a place to go for information, it's because of examples like this,' Blachford said. 'And we have got to overcome that.'

A review of the Rolling Stone article by the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism found 'journalistic failure' encompassing 'reporting, editing, editorial supervision, and fact checking.'

The article was emblematic of the dangers of cutting corners and rushing to publication with a preconceived notion, Blachford said.

'This was the classic error of sitting down with someone and not asking the hard questions,' Blachford said. 'You have got to ask the hard questions.'

Stephen Berry, UI associate journalism professor, said he addressed the controversy with his classes last week but doesn't think the incident will prompt systematic changes because most professors already harp on accuracy and verification.

The Columbia investigation could, however, prompt educators to 'double down on those lessons,' Berry said.

'I certainly will do that in my classes,' he said. 'Because the journalistic lapses in Rolling Stone's work were so fundamentally wrong.'

At ISU's Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication, Director Michael Bugeja said he has students write down their convictions because 'that's where you're going to get nailed in a hoax.'

'And the repercussions are great,' he said. 'When a reporter is taken in, the ramifications for that person and the audience of that person reverberate for years.'

'This is a concern'

In this case, analysts have pointed to the potential impact on sexual assault victims.

With the Rolling Stone review just out and the controversy only a few months old, sexual assault response officials on Iowa's public campuses say it's nearly impossible to draw a correlation with rises and falls in reports.

But, according to one official, it's a concern of some students.

'I understand the fear victims associate with reporting is a very real concern,' said Anthony Greiter, community outreach officer for ISU police. 'It's one that we have been addressing for years, not just since these publications have come to light.'