The recent revelation by Rolling Stone about inaccuracies on their story about rape at the University of Virginia has sent shock waves throughout the country. Last month the magazine published "A Rape on Campus," and it told the story of a young woman by the name of Jackie.
According to the article, Jackie was just starting her freshman year when she was brutally attacked by seven men at a fraternity party. The story went on to say that the University was negligent in its investigation into the crime.
But last week Rolling Stone issued a formal apology about the story ... Saying that the magazine could not verify parts of Jackie's story.
But while many victim advocates were angry with the magazine and the reporting, many expressed worry about the potential fallout of the story.
What might this do to the movement to bring attention to campus sexual assault? Will this make victims even more reluctant to come forward?
We talk about it with Hanna Rosin - she's a writer for the Atlantic and Slate's Double X magazine, and was one of the first to question the report. She even talked to Rolling Stone reporter Sabrina Erdely for the Slate podcast, the Double X Gabfest.
Host A Martinez began by asking her what made her first doubt parts of the story.
HANNA ROSIN: First there was no response at all rom the people that she was accusing from this crime. Generally in a story there's a sentence that says we couldn't reach them for comment or they denied the allegations or something even generic like that. But that was missing from the story.
When asked what effect this now doubted story might have on the national conversation about sexual assaults on campus, Rosin says, "It depends."
HR: A lot of what happened in the story could be valid ... there's clearly a problem ... lots of people complaining about how the system treats them, about how the system handles cases, and by people I mean both rape victims and the accused.