The Mast-Head: Anonymous Allegations

Columbia Journalism Review’s lengthy analysis of “A Rape on Campus,” a 2014 Rolling Stone article that was largely based on allegations that could not be verified, is an education for everyone who works in the news business as well as for readers.

To recap briefly, the article in Rolling Stone recounted a story provided by a woman whose name it withheld about an alleged gang rape at a University of Virginia fraternity house. Quickly, though, the account was called into question, with writers for The Washington Post and Slate, among others, expressing serious doubts within about two weeks of the story’s publication.

Key to the original criticism of the piece, by Sabrina Rubin Erdely, is that the news media almost always obtain comment from individuals accused of criminal acts or from their representatives, and that Rolling Stone had been unable to do that. Ms. Erdely tried, but was unable to independently verify that the unnamed men accused of rape actually existed. Basic standards of journalism dictate that the story should have been killed right there.

To a significant extent, Rolling Stone’s easy willingness to use anonymous sources is a problem that could affect any number of publications. “Jackie,” the pseudonym given to the U.V.A. accuser, could say whatever she liked with minimal risk of consequences. And, without a police report indicating that a crime had been committed, there was no indication, other than Jackie’s word, that one had taken place. This lack of accountability did not deter Rolling Stone, or Ms. Erdely, who continued to say after questions were raised that she found Jackie’s story credible.

Had Rolling Stone’s editors balked at hanging such a serious piece on an anonymous source, with the identity of alleged perpetrators obscured, a marred account could have been avoided.

At The Star, our rule on unnamed voices is to avoid them in almost all cases. Anonymity is only justified when the information is essential to a story (which is almost never) and the speaker’s identity and credibility is known to an editor.

Ms. Erdely could have written a powerful story about sexual violence against women on campus without Jackie’s allegations. There is no story so compelling that it should not be checked out.