The case of the Rolling Stone magazine report of the University of Virginia alleged rape is seen through the viewpoint of a conservative source. The Rolling Stone Magazine reported on the gang rape of a woman named Jackie during a party at a fraternity house at University of Virginia. Jackie, the rape victim, discussed her story with Rolling Stone. Rolling Stone also reported on the University’s failure to respond to the assault, and to further research other sexual assaults at the University.
However, recently Rolling Stone apologized to the public due to the fact that there have been discrepancies from the account of the sexual assault and rape by Jackie. Therefore, Rolling Stone published a response to their former publication, A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice, which explains how the magazine got their information and how their original judgment was Rolling Stone’s mistake not Jackie’s mistake.
Rape and sexual assault allegations towards women have occurred in multiple universities. Many believe that women ask to be sexually assaulted or raped because of the clothes they wear and how they act. Others believe otherwise. Due to this controversy, it is evident that viewers understand both viewpoints of what Rolling Stone published and the story of Jackie.
The conservative author, Rod Dreher, first gives the reader an excerpt from the Rolling Stone report to read from, and then gives his view on the excerpt. He states that Rolling Stone published a story only based on one person whose story had some very relevant mistakes in the story. I somewhat agree with what the author states. I believe that in order to bring awareness to an ongoing issue, there has to be as many reports on the subject as reporters and news sources can find. In cases such as these, there needs to be an opportunity for each side to give an account of the events before publishing the article, and then leave it up to the readers to decide what they believe.