by Kylie Handler, editor
Sunday’s New Yorker report alleging sexual misconduct by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in college has been called into question by media outlets across the political spectrum. Even liberal media journalists are criticizing the magazine for running their story without including confirmed evidence.
According to RedState, several news outlets — including NBC, The New York Times, and The Washington Post — passed on reporting the story that Kavanaugh allegedly exposed himself to a classmate during a party in college.
The New Yorker piece headlined, “Senate Democrats Investigate a New Allegation of Sexual Misconduct, from the Brett Kavanaugh’s College Years,” has been widely criticized by the media for caring more about reporting the story than getting the facts right.
[EXPOSED] The Truth About Area 51 [sponsored]
A chorus of critics spoke out on Sunday and Monday as the lack of evidence cast a shadow of doubt on the explosive piece.
I often like Ronan Farrow’s work, but this New Yorker piece is not good journalism. Starting with this: pic.twitter.com/lkMlCV5Hii
— Jedediah Bila (@JedediahBila) September 24, 2018
So it was too shaky for the New York Times, but the New Yorker went with it. Very telling. https://t.co/vL3xfqqQyb
— Brit Hume (@brithume) September 24, 2018
Ronan Farrow, Jane Mayer and the New Yorker ran with a story where the accuser still, today, right now, can not say that the person she is accusing actually is the one who did what she is alleging. IS THAT NUTS. pic.twitter.com/wmu8MfYLWm
— Karol Markowicz (@karol) September 24, 2018
Sponsored: Why the US Government is loading up on ammunition
David French, senior writer at the National Review said, “I take the allegations seriously, but I also take evidence, including contradictions and lack of corroboration seriously. The New Yorker story was so thin and so obviously full of holes that it was hard to interpret it as anything other than a malicious hit.”
I take the allegations seriously, but I also take evidence, including contradictions and lack of corroboration seriously. The New Yorker story was so thin and so obviously full of holes that it was hard to interpret it as anything other than a malicious hit. https://t.co/foR2QK5Hlo
— David French (@DavidAFrench) September 24, 2018
The National Review noted that it is worth mentioning that, “Of the ‘dozens’ of classmates The New Yorker contacted, all either failed ‘to respond to interview requests . . . declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party.'”
WSB Radio host Erick Erickson questioned if Farrow was added to the byline of the piece to make it seem more credible.
“All of these New Yorker stories about Kavanaugh seem as if they’re Mayer stories that Farrow was added to for credibility. Because they’re not up to his standard sourcing. Hell, they’re not really even sourced,” he wrote on Twitter.
Biblical bloodline – the shocking truth about your family revealed [sponsored]
There were also mainstream media critics who also questioned the explosive report.
Mayer appeared on “CBS This Morning” on Monday and was questioned by co-host Gayle King if she felt comfortable reporting on the allegations even though the accuser, Debbie Ramirez, admitted she has gaps in her memory.
CNN political commentator Steve Cortes wrote on Twitter, “So this sham story couldn’t even meet the low standards of The NY Times. Journalism is largely dead in America, very damaging to our Republic.”
As many media critics have pointed out, neither Mayer or Farrow have come forward with a witness having firsthand knowledge of the accusations.
Sponsored: Shocking new theory about the book of Genesis
Despite all of the criticism of the New Yorker piece, both Mayer and Farrow spent Monday defending their piece and the claims that they have presented.
–Kylie Handler is a news editor for The Horn News