|
 Phi Kappa Psi's announcement came a day after a team from the
Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism concluded in a
report that the magazine had failed to follow basic journalistic
safeguards.
The 9,000-word story described how a student identified by her real
first name, Jackie, said she endured a gang rape at the fraternity
in 2012. The allegations sent shockwaves through the campus about 70
miles (113 km) from Richmond, Virginia's capital. After the article
was published in November, students demonstrated on campus and in
front of the fraternity house, which was vandalized.
"Clearly our fraternity and its members have been defamed, but more
importantly we fear this entire episode may prompt some victims to
remain in the shadows, fearful to confront their attackers," Stephen
Scipione, president of the fraternity in Charlottesville, Virginia,
said in a statement.
Fraternity chapter spokesman Brian Ellis said he did not know what
would be in the lawsuit, or when the fraternity's lawyers would file
it. The fraternity said on Monday that images of its house continue
to be used by news organizations as a symbol of campus sexual
assault.
 Rolling Stone declined to comment. The magazine is owned by Jann
Wenner, who founded it in 1967 primarily to cover music and culture.
The privately held company, Wenner Media LLC, also publishes the
magazines Us Weekly and Men's Journal.
PROVING RECKLESSNESS
To prevail in a defamation lawsuit, the fraternity would need to
first show the accusations against it in the story were false and
that it suffered damages as a result, such as fewer applicants or
reduced donations from alumni, said Rebecca Tushnet, a Georgetown
University law professor.
Then it would need to show that Rolling Stone was negligent in its
reporting. If a court finds that the fraternity was a public figure,
it would have to prove the magazine was reckless or acted with
actual malice.
"It seems to me this will very much turn on recklessness," said
Tushnet. "Did they have a little voice in the back of their heads,
saying, 'You might have a problem here,' and ignore that voice?"
Individual fraternity members could sue, she said, but the members
face an additional burden of showing harm because the average reader
likely could not have identified them from reading the article
written by contributing editor Sabrina Rubin Erdely.
Because it is a government entity, the University of Virginia likely
could not sue for defamation, Tushnet said.
An investigation by Charlottesville police found no evidence that
Jackie had been gang raped.
In December, after questions about the story's veracity, Rolling
Stone apologized for "discrepancies" in the account and admitted
that it never sought comment from seven men accused of the alleged
rape.
[to top of second column] |
On Sunday, Columbia's report, commissioned by Rolling Stone, cited
the magazine for reporting and editing lapses, including the failure
to verify Jackie's story with three of her friends and for not
confronting the fraternity with details of the story before
publication. The report was written by Steve Coll, dean of the
Columbia journalism school; Derek Kravitz, a postgraduate research
scholar at the school; and Sheila Coronel, academic dean at the
journalism school.
A 'HUMBLING' EXPERIENCE
Rolling Stone is represented by Davis Wright Tremaine, a law firm
with a large practice defending media organizations. Elizabeth
McNamara, a partner at the firm, referred questions to the magazine.
The magazine said in a statement on Sunday that it would commit
itself to a series of recommendations made in the Columbia
University review. Rolling Stone owner Wenner, though, told the New
York Times on Sunday that the editors of the article, Will Dana and
Sean Woods, would not lose their jobs and that Erdely would continue
to write for the magazine.
Erdely also apologized in a statement published by the New York
Times on Sunday, saying "the Columbia account of the mistakes and
misjudgments in my reporting was a brutal and humbling experience."
The decision not to fire anyone involved led to criticism of the
magazine by CNN senior media correspondent Brian Stelter and other
American media. Slate columnist Hanna Rosin said Rolling Stone's
editors appeared indifferent, while USA Today columnist Rem Rieder
called on Wenner to rethink his response.
During a news conference on Monday, two of the three authors of the
Columbia University review said it was not up to them to recommend
if people should be fired over what they called an avoidable
journalistic failure.
"We pointed out systemic and institutional problems and we are
leaving it up to Rolling Stone to decide how to deal with these
problems," said academic dean Coronel.
(Reporting by David Ingram; Additional reporting by Sebastien Malo
and Jennifer Saba in New York and Ayesha Rascoe in Washington;
Editing by Alan Crosby, Noeleen Walder and Lisa Shumaker)
[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. |
