This was clearly evidenced with the media and their Joe Paterno and Penn State/Sandusky stories most of which got just about every "fact" wrong, were based on assumptions and what they thought would get the biggest audience, not what was true, and then made it worse when they rolled over and played dead for the Freeh Report, writing stories about the report as if it actually had presented facts that substantiated it's conclusions when it didn't even come close and in many cases fabricated "facts" that the media and those who believe them, swallowed as true.
It's not the first time the media has caused untold damage because of shoddy reporting ( we went to war helped by the false reporting by Judith Miller and the New York Times over Sadaam's non-existant WMD), and this is no exception since the very accreditation of a great university is in danger of being lost, along with a lot of other things as a result of a report that is in every way, dishonest and factually corrpupt but which the news media gave credence. As a result, lazy grandstanding bureaucrats like Mark Emmert of the NCAA and Rodney Erickson, the new president of Penn State, acted on the report but more because of the credence and publicity given to it by the media.
Now a Freeh Report skeptic has issued these same journalists a challenge: He has offered to pay $10,000 to any news organization or to any charity they designate if Tim Curley and Gary Schultz are convicted of the charges against them, charges of which they have already been convicted by the media.. If after hearing all the evidence they are acquitted by a jury, then those journalists or their news organizations who were so quick to treat the Freeh Report as fact, would in turn pay $10,000.
Given that it was the conclusions drawn by the Freeh Report on the actions of Curley, Schultz and Spanier ( and Paterno) that was the basis for the NCAA sanctions, there is no reason why journalists who want to stand by his or her story wouldn't want to make $10,000 for charity and put their money, and integrity where their mouth is. Unless they have no confidence in either.
But one would think that any journalist, like those at Deadspin.com who were one of the most vocal, and certain of their position regarding the guilt of Paterno and others, ( without facts, naturally) as well as journalists for ESPN, Sean Gregory at Time magazine, Roland Martin at CNN and more, would take up the challenge for the sake of charity and to stand up for their own integrity and journalistic competence.
If any do, it will be reported here. And, if as expected, none do that will be reported here too.
More information on the challenge and the PR release related to it, can be found by clicking this link.