This looks like a good libel case against Dunham, if he chooses to bring
one. As noted earlier, /"Rolling Stone magazine has backed off from its
blockbuster story about an alleged gang rape at the University of
Virginia..."/
'A Bad Week for Rape Culture'
http://tinyurl.com/llx5afu
'Rolling Stone apologizes for 'discrepancies' in UVA rape story'
http://tinyurl.com/o2ms67d
/"Worse, it is increasingly clear that Rolling Stone is not only
indulging in one of the most high-profile examples of rape apology in
recent memory, but that it is also keen to blame the victim. In its
retraction, the outfit squarely places the responsibility for the
mistake on Jackie herself --- a classic move."/
National Review:
http://tinyurl.com/kw5l76b
>
It's beginning to look like the news posted by MJ has some cracks in
it (no pun intended). Although I used to read Rolling Stone and I was
around when Jann Wenner founded the mag, I've always thought it was
just a groupie rag. And Jan's editorial policy and his rejection of
legalizing cannabis caused me to cancel my subscription, it looks like
it's over for RS. There no credibility in it now.
Rolling Stone apologizes for 'discrepancies' in UVA rape story:
http://news.yahoo.com/rolling-stone-uva-rape-story-retraction-180722194.html
/"Journalists who contemplate such matters are now wondering whether
the incredible Rolling Stone story about the gang rape of a University
of Virginia student is just that: not credible."/
Is the UVA Rape Story a Gigantic Hoax?
http://reason.com/blog/2014/12/01/is-the-uva-rape-story-a-gigantic-hoax
'Rolling Stone whiffs in reporting on alleged rape'
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2014/12/02/rolling-stone-whiffs-in-reporting-on-alleged-rape/
