Ben Smith, Junot Díaz, and How the Anti-#MeToo Sausage Gets Made

A report that author Junot Díaz was “cleared” of sexual misconduct allegations shows how media outlets run cover for powerful men.

“Delete” is always located next to “power.” Photo by Ujesh Krishnan on Unsplash

The #MeToo movement was a triumph of journalism as much as anything else. Prior to the October 2017 expose of Harvey Weinstein at the New York Times, reporters often treated sexual assault and harassment claims as “he-said-she-said,” even when it was one “he” against several dozen “shes.” What reporters Jodi Kantor and Meghan Twohey showed was that, with careful, diligent investigation, after working for months or years to corroborate victims’ stories, reporters could verify those allegations.

This year, on November 28, Semafor editor in chief Ben Smith set out to prove that one could also clear an alleged abuser with reporting. How do you do that? Simple: You just don’t do an investigation.

Smith’s piece, “Junot Díaz in Limbo,” caused a minor uproar on Twitter when it first came out. Its errors were quickly pointed out in a viral Twitter thread by Felicia Sonmez. The piece is a sad-sack male-victim-of-#MeToo piece of the sort we’ve already seen many times. Smith announces that Díaz has been “cleared” of sexual misconduct, and sets out to prove that Díaz’s life and career have been ruined by allegations, before revealing midway through the piece that Díaz is still a tenured MIT professor, member of the Pulitzer board, and book critic at the New York Times.

Yet Smith’s piece is not just annoying; it is also wrong. I’ve spent the past several weeks looking into Smith’s work, including a review of supporting documents and an audio recording of an interview given to Smith. At multiple points, Smith was given information that contradicted the narrative pushed by Díaz and his defenders. At each point, he either refused to investigate those leads or did not recognize them as leads in the first place.

Key sources were never contacted. Corroborating evidence and testimony was ignored. Serious allegations were introduced and not investigated. Personal opinion — or, worse, the unchallenged assertions of Díaz’s friends and defenders — is passed off as fact. Two of the most high-profile allegations were cut out of…