Last week, we were talking about Krakauer's book
"Missoula: Rape and the Justice System in a College Town," which comes out on April 21st. My post was:
"In the wake of Rolling Stone's 'Rape on Campus' debacle, we're about to get a rape-on-campus book by the best-selling author Jon Krakauer." I said:
... I don't know whether Krakauer and his editors got the chance to do anything to acknowledge Rolling Stone controversy or to prepare for the different kind of scrutiny this book will get, now that skepticism and fact-checking zeal is cranked up far beyond what Krakauer could have envisioned when he was doing his research and writing. He must have been expecting a reception similar to the initial reaction to the Rolling Stone article — high praise for shining a light on the terrible sexual brutality of college men and the inadequate response by college administrators who must start believing women and punishing men.
A reader sent me a link an article in the Montana Kaimin — the University of Montana student newspaper — titled
"Krakauer sources a mystery":
... Krakauer is under fire amid claims he didn't interview key individuals involved with the sexual assault cases that sparked federal investigations of three different local agencies.
Former Missoula County Attorney Fred Van Valkenburg said Krakauer never tried to reach him in any way. “He is the one saying he is painting a true picture of these cases, yet he didn’t talk to the people who were directly involved in the justice system..."...
David Paoli, former defense lawyer for [former Grizzlies quarterback] Jordan Johnson, said... “I don’t think [Krakauer] contacted or spoke with individuals who can give all of the facts..."...
Kevin McRae, Deputy Commissioner for Communications and Human Resources at the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education, said... “I can say with certainty he has never sought to interview University leadership....”
Dean of Students Rhondie Voorhees said, to her knowledge, Krakauer didn’t reach out to her or anyone else in the University to her knowledge....
Missoula Police Department Public Information Officer Travis Welsh said both he and the assistant chief are unaware if the author spoke to anyone currently working at the station.... “What I hope is portrayed in his book is that the people here care about what they do and work very hard,” Welsh said.
पोस्ट्स
२० टिप्पण्या:
There's need to interview anyone when you're writing fiction.
Facts ? I don't need no stinking facts !
It took decades for the facts of the Matthew Shepard case to come out.
investigative journalist Stephen Jimenez, who has spent 13 years interviewing more than 100 people with a connection to the case. His conclusion, outlined in The Book of Matt: Hidden Truths about the Murder of Matthew Shepard, is that the grotesque murder was not a hate crime, but could instead be blamed on crystal meth, a drug that was flooding Denver and the surrounding area at the time of Matthew’s death. This new theory has, understandably, caused a lot of anger.
Of course. It does;t fit the narrative.
Jimenez found that Matthew was addicted to and dealing crystal meth and had dabbled in heroin. He also took significant sexual risks and was being pimped alongside Aaron McKinney, one of his killers, with whom he’d had occasional sexual encounters. He was HIV positive at the time of his death.
“This does not make the perfect poster boy for the gay-rights movement,” says Jimenez. “Which is a big part of the reason my book has been so trashed.”
Krakauer will not have that problem as he knows better than to rely on facts.
Into Thin Air: A Personal Account of the Mt. Everest Disaster is a 1997 bestselling non-fiction book written by Jon
Krakauer had a big hit with "Into Thin Air," but that was 18 years ago. As far as I know, nothing he's written since then has been anywhere near as big, and it seems unlikely that this ill-timed book will be an exception to that.
It must be tough to have a big hit and then try to get out of the "one-hit wonder" box.
meant to say there's no need .."
To anyone paying attention and reading between the lines, Krakauer made it pretty clear in his response to the RS retraction that his book was full of whoppers and he was going to publish it anyways, because of the usual "Larger Truth" Social Justice bullshit of telling lies for your cause being completely OK.
As someone in the previous thread linked, you can add the University's president to that list of people denying contact.
As I said in that thread. SOP for Krakauer.
I've read both Into the Wild and Into Thin Air. I enjoyed them both except for every 3rd or 4th chapter when Krakauer felt compelled to talk about himself. To me, he came off as an arrogant doofus. I am having a case schadenfreude now. I'm not proud of it.
Remember the good old days when the left proclaimed the innocence of guilty men such as Sacco, the Rosenbergs and Alger Hiss. That's so 20th Century. The new, improved way of demonstrating moral superiority is to proclaim the guilt of innocent men such as Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, and assorted frat members. This is a far more exultant way of expressing hatred.
I really liked his Mormon book.
"Why would you contact people who are just going to be biased against your point, anyway?"
--campus rape writers, lately
And it's not just stories about rape. Making no effort to corroborate a story seems now to be standard operating procedure for journalists.
A couple of months ago, we had the spectacle of the Atlantic tying itself in knots to justify not having asked the City University of New York to respond to charges that minority students were being discriminated against in senior college admissions.
http://www1.cuny.edu/mu/forum/2015/01/22/response-to-the-story-in-the-atlantic/
In fact, to date, there still has been no explanation or apology from the lead author of that article--a chaired professor at the Columbia School of Journalism!--to explain her failure to seek a response from CUNY officials regarding her overblown charges.
Remember the good old days when the left proclaimed the innocence of guilty men such as Sacco, the Rosenbergs and Alger Hiss. That's so 20th Century. The new, improved way of demonstrating moral superiority is to proclaim the guilt of innocent men such as Zimmerman, Darren Wilson, and assorted frat members. This is a far more exultant way of expressing hatred.
Yeah, from defending guilty people to slandering and smearing innocent ones.
And it's not just stories about rape. Making no effort to corroborate a story seems now to be standard operating procedure for journalists.
Which makes one wonder how they're better than bloggers.
I remind people, as often as I can, of the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect from Crichton (who said if it has names attached, it sounds more official).
You read a story on a topic you know and notice how utterly wrong the reporting is. In virtually every category, they get the most basic stuff wrong.
You then read the next story, on something you don't know well, and assume that THIS story is accurate when zero evidence exists to believe that.
The Gell-Man Amnesia Effect also exists in NO other area of your life. The only people you trust after they lie to you repeatedly are reporters and writers.
His Mormon book was crap, so far from "meticulously researched" as to be caricature. Given what I just read in the story Ann linked to in the Montana Kaimin, I don't expect much better in this case.
His Mormon book was crap, so far from "meticulously researched" as to be caricature. Given what I just read in the story Ann linked to in the Montana Kaimin, I don't expect much better in this case.
Well yeah. Low hanging fruit coupled with confirmation bias from your readers makes the best stories.
We could really use a well-researched and thoughtful book about how in this day and age where rape is the most socially odious crime and women are more empowered than ever before, there are still a lot of rapes occurring and it is difficult to pursue a rape allegation to a successful prosecution. A good book like that could explore the hurdles faced by victims, by institutions, by the civil authorities and by the unjustly accused, as well as possible remedies for these hurdles.
It doesn't sound like this will be that sort of book.
Rape stats in Missoula are in line with other western college towns. i.e. very low relative to non-college towns. Where's the outrage over non-college women being assaulted?
When I read Into The Wild, I wondered how Krakauer had dug up so many facts about the young man's wide travels when he had changed his name and cut off communications with all who knew him. I chalked it up to Krakauer's investigative and reportorial skills. Now I wonder if he just made stuff up.
Seeing Krakauer's on Charlie Rose pretty much convinced me not to buy or read the book. His support for investigation outside of the limitations that are imposed by respect for due process, for rational inquiry, and for common intellectual decency is outrageous. Beyond mere prejudice he participates in an enforced zeitgeist which regards evidence and due process as tools of oppression and interprets skepticism and questioning as acts of hostility.
Rape is a crime and universities should be mandatory reporters to the civil authorities and like the Catholic church should not be adjudicating beyond their competence.
This book dispels many false beliefs about non stranger rape. It shows how victims of a terrible crime are often treated like criminals simply for coming forward. This is a huge PROBLEM. Please read the book before passing judgement!
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा