Thread by @classicalbeat

Refuting two common misconceptions about today’s AP Domingo story, and #MeToo stories in general: a short thread. 1/

One misconception re: Domingo story: “There’s no proof!” Getting these stories into print means talking to 3x the number of people who are willing to be quoted; exhaustively fact-checking their stories w/ friends &colleagues & independent sources & the alleged perpetrators... 2/

...being understanding when people change their minds about going on the record; leaving paragraphs on the cutting-room floor because they don’t meet the (rightly) exacting standards of the legal department — a process that takes months, even years. 3/

It’s almost amusing to me that after all that goes into them, people see such stories as unsubstantiated. If @jgecker got 9 accusers in print in her 1st Domingo story, and 11 in the new one, I would bet she has a couple dozen more that for various reasons she can’t print. 4/

@jgecker Two: “If everybody knew, why didn’t people, especially journalists, speak up sooner?” First, see point One, above. Second: Before the #MeToo movement, there was no support for such a story — it wouldn’t necessarily have been seen as a story. 5/

@jgecker The James Levine story is the only one journalists seriously considered. 6/

@jgecker And if you want proof of how hard the Levine story is to get, consider that even now, in the #MeToo era, the story of whatever did or didn't happen while he was at the Met — which, supposedly, “everybody knew” — has yet to be told, one way or the other, & may never be. 7/

@jgecker A PS: what I wrote above about how hard it is to get these stories into print is true of all investigative journalism, not just #MeToo stories. A huge amount of work goes into these stories; a lot of that doesn't make it into print, but it certainly informs what is written. -x-