The headline is unusually blunt: ‘Is the New York Times Smearing Jameis Winston?,’ a reference to the Heisman-winning quarterback of Florida State, who has been accused of rape, a case discussed in 40 New York Times articles. Stuart Taylor, Jr., author of the blunt article today on Real Clear Sports, is an attorney and veteran journalist who has worked for National Journal and the New York Times.
Taylor, co-author (with KC Johnson) of the classic analysis of the Duke lacrosse hoax, “Until Proven Innocent,” thinks the Times’s many articles on Winston are “all pointing to a single conclusion: He is guilty, and the state of Florida and his school have excused his crime because of his football prowess. But there is a large body of evidence that The Times has kept from its readers that would lead a discerning reader to another conclusion: that Winston has been cleared by three separate investigations because the evidence shows that his claim that his accuser consented to have sex is as credible as her often-revised account.”
One thought on “The Strange Effort to Get Jameis Winston”
The stance of guilty regardless of evidence has become the social stance concerning cases of sexual impropriety in which the accused is male.
This is the result of feminist actions to make accusations of sexual impropriety a matter of subjectivity rather than objectivity. If such matters are determined on a subjective basis, there cannot be a question of innocence, the accused is guilty by default.