The Duke University rape allegations will be remembered as a turning point in the history of judicial-media relations

James P. Pinkerton:

A headline in Friday's USA Today summed up the situation: "Prosecutors, defense 'trying their case in public.'" The paper quoted one veteran prosecutor as saying that defense lawyers had gone "way, way beyond the limits of what's fair." But on the other hand, it was the Durham County prosecutor, Mike Nifong, who gave some 70 interviews in the weeks following the March 13 incident; Nifong even found time to appear at a "violence against women" event, held at a local black college, which could best be described as a "re-elect Nifong" campaign rally.

Even the nominally blue-chip news portals are getting in on the act. The New York Times, which sets the agenda for the rest of the mainstream media, has found itself drawn to the Duke case - even though, traditionally, the Times has seen itself as being above such tabloid-y fare.

So why these changing Times? The main reason is competitive pressure; no paper can resist the public fascination with this case. Yet blogger Steve Sailer offers another reason: The Times, he says, loves a story in which blacks might have been criminally victimized by whites, because it reverses the all-too familiar pattern. So the Times jumps at the chance to show whites acting badly, thus elevating the paper's self-appointed status as the arbiter of social and racial justice. As Sailer puts it, "The Duke lacrosse team, a bunch of rich preppie jerks, makes a wonderful target for other whites wishing to parade their moral superiority."

TCV Update: Duke Rape Witness Changes Tune; Attempts to Profit from Case

New York PR Firm Won't Represent Second Dancer At Lacrosse Party