For context, Ruth Shalit aka Ruth S. Barrett is (or was) a
conservative journalist who worked at several magazines like GQ, the NYT
mag and the New Republic. She was very successful for a time, quickly
rising from intern to associate editor shortly after graduating from
Princeton. That all started unraveling when she was revealed
to have plagiarized several articles in 1994, and reached its nadir with
the publication of “Race
in the Newsroom”, a highly critical account of the Washington Post’s
affirmative action efforts which was
found to contain major factual errors. She became increasingly
marginalized in the media and eventually left the New Republic in
1999.
Twenty-one years later, the Atlantic decided to give her a second
chance, running as a feature her article “The
Mad, Mad World of Niche Sports Among Ivy League–Obsessed Parents”, a
feature ostensibly about the Ivy League admissions rat race – this time
under her married name “Ruth S. Barrett”, conveniently abbreviating the
part which would have tipped readers off it was written by a plagiarist.
The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple, along with many other journalists,
raised several
concerns about the article, and the Atlantic’s fact-checking team
found it couldn’t verify several basic details about the story. It all
came tumbling down and the Atlantic retracted the story.
This is a simple story of fraud, and I think it points to a genuinely
ridiculous level of racism on the parts of rationalists to see them make
a martyr out of a plainly-verifiable charlatan because they’re
“challenging the consensus on race” or whatever.
That Atlantic article has the second best editor’s note I have read.
It’s an entire article by itself.
The first is one on an Intercept article about people calling in bomb
threats to Jewish centers that explains that it was an ex-Intercept
journalist that called in those threats.
> The first is one on an Intercept article about people calling in bomb threats to Jewish centers that explains that it was an ex-Intercept journalist that called in those threats.
oh man can you link this? my google-fu isn't up to par right now
edit: [jk i redeemed myself](https://theintercept.com/2017/02/28/trump-surrogate-suggests-democrats-could-be-behind-bomb-threats-against-jews/)
For context, Ruth Shalit aka Ruth S. Barrett is (or was) a conservative journalist who worked at several magazines like GQ, the NYT mag and the New Republic. She was very successful for a time, quickly rising from intern to associate editor shortly after graduating from Princeton. That all started unraveling when she was revealed to have plagiarized several articles in 1994, and reached its nadir with the publication of “Race in the Newsroom”, a highly critical account of the Washington Post’s affirmative action efforts which was found to contain major factual errors. She became increasingly marginalized in the media and eventually left the New Republic in 1999.
Twenty-one years later, the Atlantic decided to give her a second chance, running as a feature her article “The Mad, Mad World of Niche Sports Among Ivy League–Obsessed Parents”, a feature ostensibly about the Ivy League admissions rat race – this time under her married name “Ruth S. Barrett”, conveniently abbreviating the part which would have tipped readers off it was written by a plagiarist. The Washington Post’s Erik Wemple, along with many other journalists, raised several concerns about the article, and the Atlantic’s fact-checking team found it couldn’t verify several basic details about the story. It all came tumbling down and the Atlantic retracted the story.
This is a simple story of fraud, and I think it points to a genuinely ridiculous level of racism on the parts of rationalists to see them make a martyr out of a plainly-verifiable charlatan because they’re “challenging the consensus on race” or whatever.
“The accusations might be technically true, but people only brought them up because they have an axe to grind!”
That Atlantic article has the second best editor’s note I have read. It’s an entire article by itself.
The first is one on an Intercept article about people calling in bomb threats to Jewish centers that explains that it was an ex-Intercept journalist that called in those threats.