Disrupting the Narrative of the New Left, its allies in Academia, Hollywood and the Establishment Media, and examining with honesty the goals of cultural Marxism and the dangers of reactionary and abusive political correctness.
THE NARRATIVE AND POLITICAL CORRECTNESS
“Threats to freedom of speech, writing and action, though often trivial in isolation, are cumulative in their effect and, unless checked, lead to a general disrespect for the rights of the citizen.”-George Orwell
Showing posts with label hate-crime hoaxes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label hate-crime hoaxes. Show all posts
Clock-"inventing" Muslim teen Ahmed caused a furor in Texas when he was arrested at school. But was he really a victim of "Islamophobia", as we were all told? Or are Ahmed and his family clever grifters manipulating the press and politicians?
A study claiming that gay people advocating same-sex marriage can change voters' minds has been retracted due to fraud.
What's more, the funding agencies credited with supporting the study deny having any involvement.
The study was published last December in Science, and received lots of media attention (including from BuzzFeed News). It found that a 20-minute, one-on-one conversation with a gay political canvasser could steer voters in favor of same-sex marriage. Not only that, but these changed opinions lasted for at least a year and influenced other people in the voter's household, the study found.
Donald Green, the senior author on the study, retracted it on Tuesday shortly after learning that his co-author, UCLA graduate student Michael LaCour, had faked the results. Science posted an official "editorial expression of concern" — a very big deal in the science world — on Wednesday afternoon.
"I am deeply embarrassed by this turn of events and apologize to the editors, reviewers, and readers of Science," Green, a professor of political science at Columbia University, said in his retraction letter to the journal, as posted on the Retraction Watch blog.
This American Life, the hugely popular radio program that featured this study in an episode in April, interviewed Green on Wednesday about the problems with the study.
"There was an incredible mountain of fabrications with the most baroque and ornate ornamentation. There were stories, there were anecdotes, my dropbox is filled with graphs and charts, you'd think no one would do this except to explore a very real data set," Green told the show's host, Ira Glass.
Speaking of anecdotes, Rod Dreher has one that deals with rampant fraud in academic research:
A graduate student friend in medicine told me not long ago that she had decided to take her medical career in a different direction after an internship at a highly prestigious research institution. She said she observed the widespread practice of graduate students fudging data to get desired results - this, with the full knowledge, consent, and even encouragement of their supervisors.
It wasn't major fraud, she said, but it was fraud, and it was done as part of a general ethos of tweaking scientific results to get the outcome needed to guarantee grant money. Nothing political there, but she said the whole experience disillusioned her about the supposed disinterestedness of science.
The method, she said, is supposed to be disinterested, and it is, but science is still carried out by scientists, who are human beings, not robots. She didn't want to be the sort of scientist who got sucked into the maelstrom of ego and competition for grants, fearing that she would start to fudge data because everybody else was doing it.
@RollingStone what little cred RS had remaining disappears. Maybe the press will stop being judge & jury w/sketchy facts.
— Richard Church (@Slicyman) December 5, 2014
Interesting how rape apologists think that if they can “discredit” one rape story, that means no other rape stories can be true, either.
— Amanda Marcotte (@AmandaMarcotte) December 5, 2014
@AmandaMarcotte "Rape apologists"? That's what you're getting out of this? You're not outraged at RS for the lies hurting actual rape vics?
— Lady Patriarchy (@CounslrObvious) December 5, 2014
@AmandaMarcotte Is everyone who was (rightfully) skeptical of this story a rape apologist?
— Anthony L. Fisher (@anthonyLfisher) December 5, 2014
Apparently, according to @AmandaMarcotte, someone insisting people fact check serious accusations = rape apologist. Ridiculous.
— Future President (@GovernorOfTN) December 5, 2014
.@AmandaMarcotte You are completely wrong, both morally and factually, and you're trying to avoid the harm you've done by pointing fingers.
— Melissa Clouthier (@MelissaTweets) December 5, 2014
Interesting how not a single person in the world is saying that. It's just the voices in your head, Mandy. They're not real. @AmandaMarcotte
— Blaknsam (@Blaknsam) December 5, 2014
What I've learned the past few weeks: If I don't accept that "all cops are killers" & "all men are rapists" I'm not taking things seriously.
— SFK (@stephenkruiser) December 5, 2014
.@sallykohn You can admit when you or something you supported are wrong. Believe it or not, people actually respect that type of humility.
— T. Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) December 5, 2014
@sallykohn Try this: "I apologize. I was wrong to attack skeptics who simply wanted to maintain basic standards of reporting" @JonahNRO
— Amerigo Chattin (@AmerigoChattin) December 5, 2014
Also, fuck you RS for trying to throw your source under the bus: this is on you, not her http://t.co/xb8g3aAveM
— Christopher Hayes (@chrislhayes) December 5, 2014
.@chrislhayes What are you talking about??? It's not "on her", the woman who potentially LIED about a gang rape and could've ruined lives?
— AJ Delgado (@AJDelgado13) December 5, 2014
I like that @SabrinaRErdely seems to spend much of her time on Twitter explaining what constitutes good reporting.
— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) December 5, 2014
Getting ready to divulge all my interviewing technique secrets to @Penn students at @dailypenn journalism bootcamp today. Where to begin??
— Sabrina Rubin Erdely (@SabrinaRErdely) January 12, 2014
Much credit due writer and editor Richard Bradley whose single blog post 1st called attention to huge holes in @RollingStone UVa rape story.
— Brit Hume (@brithume) December 5, 2014
Much credit also due @washingtonpost for doing the reporting @RollingStone should have done on the now discredited UVa gang rape story.
— Brit Hume (@brithume) December 5, 2014
No credit due UVa student paper @cavalierdaily for coverage of bogus rape accusations. Even this pm no mention of @RollingStone retraction.
— Brit Hume (@brithume) December 5, 2014
Will UVa Pres. Teresa Sullivan apologize & reinstate fraternities after utterly premature reaction to now discredited gang rape story?
— Brit Hume (@brithume) December 5, 2014
@brithume no, it's perfectly natural to blame an entire group of people based on a false narrative #Ferguson
— Erik Sears (@ersears) December 5, 2014
@brithume Betting large, very large, that UVA will go the way of Oberlin: "well, it could have happened." Also that RS fires nobody.
— Joseph DiLuca (@joeinthejeep) December 5, 2014
Feminists are making impressive Kamikaze attacks on intellectual honesty right now: https://t.co/Yi9sQywffO
— el Sooper Ù† (@SooperMexican) December 5, 2014
Shorter @Shakestweetz If something is untrue but it fits with your narrative, you should believe it…. emphatically. pic.twitter.com/OmSBVuA3nq
— Jenn Jacques (@JennJacques) December 5, 2014
@KatMcKinley The whole series needed a "Look, It's Not Rape Culture When Our Favorite Celebrities Do It" headline.
— jimgeraghty (@jimgeraghty) December 5, 2014
If there's ever been a publication that objected to the sexualization of violence, it's Rolling Stone. pic.twitter.com/G7QF1T0SuW
— jimgeraghty (@jimgeraghty) December 5, 2014
