“The Hunting Ground” was not nominated for the best documentary category at the Oscars, a blow to the filmmakers who have worked so hard defending their film from criticism.
The film, which is more accurately described as propaganda than a documentary, received intense backlash from journalists (and commentary writers such as myself), film critics and law professors for its loose adherence to facts.
The film relied on debunked statistics to claim that campus sexual assault is an “epidemic,” including heavily featuring David Lisak, whose theory about serial predators was debunked earlier this year. It’s become common knowledge that the claim that 1-in-5 women will be sexually assaulted while in college is controversial, based on self-reported surveys that broaden the definition of sexual assault and ignore the fact that most women say they don’t report because they don’t think their encounter was a big deal.
But Lisak’s study was downright fraudulent, in that it didn’t actually look at campus sexual assault but was used in that regard to further his status in the anti-rape community.
Further, the two key accusations in “The Hunting Ground” didn’t hold up under scrutiny. Former Florida State University (my alma mater) quarterback Jameis Winston was cleared by three investigations, and even if you buy the idea that they were biased or severely flawed, the facts we know about the accusation are questionable. What the accuser told the filmmakers didn’t line up with the evidence, and was different from versions she told the police.
Another accusation, against a Harvard Law student, left out key details about the accusation and the lack of credibility from the film’s accuser. Only at the end did the filmmakers include a blurb that the student was found guilty only of a “misdemeanor touching of a nonsexual nature,” meaning he is not the rapist portrayed in the film.
When CNN aired the film, they had to cut parts out to avoid liability, as Winston’s lawyers threatened to sue and Harvard Law professors called out the filmmakers for their false representation.
And just before CNN aired the film, it was discovered that a crewmember had been altering Wikipedia articles to conform facts to the film’s false narratives.
All of this, plus a Variety film critic calling the film “shoddy journalism,” may have led to the film not getting nominated for best documentary, even though they had been on the shortlist.
“The Hunting Ground” was, however, nominated in the best original song category.
My theory is that the “rape culture” narrative supporting Hollywood sincerely wanted to give “The Hunting Ground” a documentary nomination, but that the film has become so toxic and embarrassing that it was impractical to do so. Instead, they gave it the consolation prize of a best original song nomination.
This way, “The Hunting Ground” can still claim to be Oscar-nominated (or Oscar-winning, depending on how the awards go). The filmmakers won’t have to note that they were nominated for a song, and people who see marketing for the film will think it must be truthful since it was nominated for an Oscar.
But, as with all things involving “The Hunting Ground,” one will need to look just below the surface to see the truth.
Ashe Schow is a commentary writer for the Washington Examiner.
