Sunday, May 18, 2014

The WSJ does itself proud, repudiating Shribman's 11 April adulatory review of Cohan's dishonest book, THE PRICE OF SILENCE


Today, a tough detailed review by a member of the editorial board:

Opinion

A Dishonest Rewrite of the Duke Lacrosse Case

On an author's publicity tour, he's even more explicit in trying to taint the students who were falsely accused.

This is the start:
In the outpouring of praise for William D. Cohan's new book "The Price of Silence"—a work, remarkably enough, being celebrated as a model of evenhandedness, scrupulous objectivity, etc.—one essential has gone overlooked. Namely, the central point of this tale about the Duke lacrosse case and accusations against three players of rape and assault at a house party. It takes no close reading to see that the book is meant to recast the story so as to nullify the outcome Americans thought they knew—that the players were exonerated and had been falsely accused. In Mr. Cohan's portrayal, the workings of decency and justice were undone by malign forces—among them, it would seem, the ability to hire defense attorneys.
The three members of the Duke lacrosse team charged with attacking a hapless black woman—a stripper hired to perform at their March 2006 house party—were ultimately cleared, after enduring months of public vilification by District Attorney Mike Nifong, when the attorney general who replaced him dropped the case and declared the young men innocent. They had been the subject of wholly incredible allegations by the accuser, as DNA findings confirmed.

Dorothy Rabinowitz's conclusion:
To Mr. Cohan, apparently, true justice is served by allowing a prosecutor oblivious to ethical constraints to bring a groundless case in the hopes of winning a jury conviction. And by the writing of his book attempting to restore the taint of guilt and suspicion on three young men who had been cleared despite all Mr. Nifong's fraudulent effort. Mr. Cohan's grim refrain, "We will never know what happened in that bathroom"-a faithful image of the substance Mr. Nifong brought to his case-stands as a perfect tribute to that predecessor.

IT IS ABSOLUTELY REMARKABLE THAT THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" LET A MEMBER OF THE EDITORIAL BOARD WRITE A VEHEMENT REPUDIATION OF THE STUPID, INCOMPETENT REVIEW OF "THE PRICE OF SILENCE" BY DAVID M. SHRIBMAN WHICH IT PUBLISHED ON 11 APRIL 2014. THE "WALL STREET JOURNAL" DOES ITSELF PROUD BY DOROTHY RABINOWITZ'S LONG REVIEW. RABINOWITZ ABSOLUTELY VINDICATES THE GREAT STRING OF ONE STAR REVIEWS THIS CONTEMPTIBLE BOOK HAS RECEIVED ON AMAZON. The title of my review here still stands--William D. Cohan's THE PRICE OF SILENCE should never have been published, and the adulatory reviewers stand shamed. Shribman may never again show his face east of Pittsburgh.

2 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  2. This is quite remarkable. A WALL STREET JOURNAL staffer, a member of the JOURNAL's editorial board, repudiates the review they paid David M. Shribman for back in the 11 April 2014 WALL STREET JOURNAL. Who bets on Shribman's venturing his shameful and shamed head out of the basement toilet of the Pittsburgh POST-GAZETTE any time soon?

    This almost never happens. Stuart got Brian Lamb to book him to correct Cohan, but that too was remarkable.

    Comment on comment by Duke Parent 2004
    Agreed, in excelsis.. Cohan and his cronies will not be able to dismiss Rabinowitz as just another “hater” or crank.. Ah, to be a fly on the wall in the offices of the WSJ . . . Must be some red-faced staffers there looking to take their vacations a few months earlier than normal. As for friends and family of Mr. Cohan, I’d bet that at least some of them would now trade squirming at the continuing disembowelment of their hero for catching him stealing from the alms box or sneaking under an open stairwell to gaze at heavenly bodies.

    ReplyDelete