When it comes to the allegation of sexual assault thrown at comedian Aziz Ansari, most people generally — though not unanimously — seem to believe two things: Ansari’s conduct was gross, but it wasn’t sexual assault.
The allegations appeared on Babe over the weekend, and the publication’s amateurish approach to the report has now been criticized by an unlikely coalition of ardent feminists, dissident feminists, and conservatives. Among that coalition there is disagreement over whether the story deserved to see the light of day at all, but there is some emerging consensus that Babe’s poor, and arguably reckless, handling of a sensitive story did #MeToo more harm than good.
In an interview with Brian Stelter of CNN, Joshi Herrmann, editor-in-chief of Babe’s parent company, defended the story by saying, “We would publish this again tomorrow.”
“It’s newsworthy,” said Herrmann, “because of who he is and what he has said in his standup, what he has written in his book, what he has proclaimed on late night TV. Her account is pointing out a striking tension between those things and the way she says he treated her in private.”
Critical to unpacking this defense is a reminder that Babe’s story included an explicit allegation of sexual assault. Presumably, if Herrmann and Babe’s editorial staff believed that allegation to be credible — as anyone who publishes such an allegation should — that would be their first and most important defense of the story’s news value. It’s interesting to me that Herrmann chose instead to argue the exposure of potential conflicts between Ansari’s public and private conduct are what elevated the story to newsworthiness.
If that’s indeed the standard for what constitutes a newsworthy allegation, it sets a much lower bar. Perhaps a bar lower than what #MeToo can sustain without losing credibility as a movement.
Framed differently, with less drama and less editorializing, Babe would have an easier time making the argument that the account of one woman’s bad date with Ansari — who clearly appears to have acted out of line — was a valuable contribution to #MeToo. Now that it’s been published, I can’t deny there’s value in (1) using it to emphasize the distinctions between Ansari and someone like Harvey Weinstein or Matt Lauer and (2) exploring whether it represents a characteristic snapshot of millennial dating, then subsequently contemplating whether that’s good or bad.
For #MeToo, I suspect it will be something of a tipping point: a moment when we finally acknowledge some accounts first deserve debate rather than final verdicts and a moment when we develop a greater sense of caution in separating serious and credible allegations from others.
Maybe, just maybe, it is still possible to prevent this story from hurting more than helping #MeToo by pausing to evaluate its lessons for those involved in the broader conversation.
