In April 1997, Ellen was on the cover of Time magazine declaring, “Yep, I’m Gay.” Then a few weeks later, her sitcom alter ego came out on TV. It was watched by 42 million people. The next year, in 1998, Will & Grace premiered on NBC. This was a watershed moment for gay representation. Then came:
This story uncovered some much disturbing information. At the time it may have been seen as a watershed moment for gay rights but in the end may have led to significant damage as mentioned. It allowed us in the gay community to ignore the very real dangers of drug addiction and replaced it with fear of violence that was unlikely to occur, mistrust of the larger community and the crutch of victimhood. Those are all damaging to the psyche of a gay man coming of age during that time and now.
Sadly both parties have caved to their respective wing nuts and liars. The liberal media had the eyeballs in the ‘90s but now the conservative media has joined the “obscure the truth if it hurts our Party,) party. Let the Great Middle America save the day!
Such a poignant, sad story about a beautiful boy, turning to the wrong people for help. His mother and father were at home waiting for their boy. Oh, woe is us.
Truly, very sincere, authentic, and commendable journalism. Thank you for not allowing a story of the past to die in the muddied waters without due process. A lot of evidence was shown to prove, at the very least, that the story was far more complicated than most urban Americans wanted to believe. I grew up in rural America in the 90’s and can attest that meth was a giant issue not being discussed at the national level. More importantly, I think this podcast points out partisan media’s compulsion to fit “evidence” to their narrative at a huge cost we haven’t yet fully recognized. Before this case (mid 90’s and earlier) rural America was considered by most to be a peaceful place in the country where people can find calm in the simple life. As pointed out in the podcast, and as my own experience also shows, this “hate crime” allowed urban America (mostly democrat) to believe that rural America (mostly republican) was a place filled with “deplorables”, to take a sample of the divisive rhetoric given by Hillary Clinton. This is simple political pandering that, in this case especially, grossly exaggerates the “facts” and conveniently leaves out any counter narrative. For what purpose? Likely to further create divide so whichever party can claim a stronger base. It’s disgusting, unamerican, and an absurd disservice to justice. Thank you, Bari. It is indeed self evident that truth is more important than narrative.
Another example of press manipulation! It is so so depressing to think we cannot trust virtually anything we read or hear from the "media." It is laziness? Cowardice? Fear of not being invited to sit at the table with the cool kids at lunch? It is so refreshing to see that real investigative reporters still exist and we have platforms like this one to get factual information so we can form our own opinions. Thanks, Ben and Bari!
"When we don't follow the facts, we misunderstand reality. And that can have severe consequences." If only more journalists (and our leaders) subscribed to this, we'd be in better shape as a country. Thanks for putting such wisdom into words, Ben.
First reports of this cruel, sad crime against Matthew Shepard were said to be gender related. This initial finding fit the narrative, which was topmost on many minds, straight and gay at the time.
Once the facts were agreed upon. in a court of law, Shepard's death was found to be the result of a drug deal gone wrong.
It seems to me we, as a nation, should aspire to keeping drugs and sexual orientation off the law books.
In my opinion, inquiries into drugs that seem to be generally harmful though in other ways helpful and lifestyles that don't follow society's norms but are not harmful can be researched but not treated as forms of lawlessness. What we learn and what we do not know should be shared widely.
I think opinions and biases can be discussed widely as long as we keep in mind what is provable and what is not; and what is a subject for the law and what is not or shouldn't be.
Crimes like murder, coercion, scams, theft and others involving harm to persons or property are police issues.
As I see it, what we learn about controversial lifestyles and drugs that are appealing to some people but also potentially dangerous are issues for individuals, families, and the medical community to manage.
I’m not sure what the point of this is. A young man was tortured and beaten to death by sadists. It had something to do with drugs and his sexuality. The standard story based on evidence presented in court is that the victim was targeted because he was gay. An alternative interpretation from the standard one is offered in the podcast, but only partially explained. Exactly what happened is left to our imagination while most of the discussion veres to attacking the playwright who wrote about it. Astounding statements like the one intended to downplay the role of Russell (name?) in the murder plead that « all he did was tie Shepard down » and that he was afraid of his drugged friend Aaron who did all the torturing. Really? That doesn’t sound so bad to you? And if this was all about a drug deal, why did Shepard get in the vehicle with these two crazed guys? Are you implying that he deserved his fate since he was involved in drugs? The podcast left me with more questions than it answered, and I think it is a disservice to toss out a halfway explanation of such a tragic event as if you were making a « big reveal. » I’m disappointed in Bari Weiss who is usually better than this.
It was a brutal crime for which two men are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole. The point is the TRUTH! This crime had nothing to do with the victim's sexuality and everything to do with the scourge of crystal meth drug addiction. The fact that the truth was swept under the rug in favor of a false narrative that served someone else's agenda meant that the focus that should have been on the REAL story of drug addiciton was lost. How many lives could have been saved in the past two decades if the that focus had not been lost? And Shepard got in the vehicle because he KNEW his attackers and certainly did not expect this to happen. Did you actually listen to the podcast?
Literally no one is arguing that the murder wasn't "so bad". This is about revealing the truth behind the events, and yet another case of the media getting basic facts wrong, and in a way that sows division in this country. Did you hear the part where Ben Kawaller said that, as a gay teen, the original narrative made him fear the US outside of NYC? I mean, you can draw a pretty straight line between the way the false narrative around Shepard's death was promulgated and Hillary Clinton's "basket of deplorables" quote and the coastal disdain for "fly-over country". Obviously what happened to Shepard was horrific, but it was a murder connected to other criminal activity, not some unique watershed hate crime. This type of crime happens all too often in this country, but most victims do not get appropriated to further a narrative that is false and creates a cottage industry of umbrage and angst and, worst of all, misunderstanding about certain parts of the country and the folks that inhabit them. I wish for one minute that the progressive folks who championed this as an example of the backwards, small-minded nature of rural America would step up and say, "yes, we got this wrong".
Fascinating that progressive activists are willing to muddy the waters of the truth for their heroes/tribunes, but are not willing to extend that courtesy to mythologized representations of Washington, Jefferson, etc. Turns out everyone is a hypocrite, as always.
Wait...are you trying to tell me this is "news???" This has been known for years...it was a drug deal gone VERY bad, by two guys who knew him.
Informed people have known for years that Kitty Genovese was NOT murdered while "thirty eight people watched and did nothing"...but people still talk about that one (e.g. Bill Clinton) as if it were true, and an established part of American History.
If it fits the narrative...it does not matter if it is true.
I love Ben Kawaller’s work. I knew of The Book of Matt though did not read it all, I recall the controversy when it came out, and believe few people are aware that Matthew Shephard’s brutal killing probably was not the anti-gay hate crime as portrayed by the media and his family and so-called friends. Therefore, very little of the factual discussion here surprised me. I say all that to preface and “contextualize” my comment that the most shocking part of the podcast to me was Ben’s interview of the man that comes at about the 45 min mark, when this interviewee seems to feel there is nothing to gain by knowing the truth, and that the truth might hurt people’s feelings so Ben and anyone seeking the truth should “read the room” and shut up. I guess I shouldn’t be shocked by this anymore. That people say it out loud and unashamedly should be shocking, but I guess even that is commonplace now. If this is what passes for ‘critical thinking’ these days, we’re so far gone…And that Henderson was treated as he was by the justice system is indeed unjust.
Bari, you have done it again!
Ben, a major shout-out!
Central Park Karen, like.
Is TFP the only group practicing real journalism? Maybe we should get you all on the White House Press Pool!!!
This story uncovered some much disturbing information. At the time it may have been seen as a watershed moment for gay rights but in the end may have led to significant damage as mentioned. It allowed us in the gay community to ignore the very real dangers of drug addiction and replaced it with fear of violence that was unlikely to occur, mistrust of the larger community and the crutch of victimhood. Those are all damaging to the psyche of a gay man coming of age during that time and now.
leftists refuse to believe the facts especially those facts that destroy their narrative
"And why did so many people refuse to believe it when investigative journalists discovered the truth? "
Because just as nature abhors a vacuum, leftists abhor the truth. Truth is anathema to leftists and leftism.
The Democratic Party of America, DELENDA EST!
Sadly both parties have caved to their respective wing nuts and liars. The liberal media had the eyeballs in the ‘90s but now the conservative media has joined the “obscure the truth if it hurts our Party,) party. Let the Great Middle America save the day!
It was a drug deal that went badly and there was some other stuff going on.
Such a poignant, sad story about a beautiful boy, turning to the wrong people for help. His mother and father were at home waiting for their boy. Oh, woe is us.
Story?
Truly, very sincere, authentic, and commendable journalism. Thank you for not allowing a story of the past to die in the muddied waters without due process. A lot of evidence was shown to prove, at the very least, that the story was far more complicated than most urban Americans wanted to believe. I grew up in rural America in the 90’s and can attest that meth was a giant issue not being discussed at the national level. More importantly, I think this podcast points out partisan media’s compulsion to fit “evidence” to their narrative at a huge cost we haven’t yet fully recognized. Before this case (mid 90’s and earlier) rural America was considered by most to be a peaceful place in the country where people can find calm in the simple life. As pointed out in the podcast, and as my own experience also shows, this “hate crime” allowed urban America (mostly democrat) to believe that rural America (mostly republican) was a place filled with “deplorables”, to take a sample of the divisive rhetoric given by Hillary Clinton. This is simple political pandering that, in this case especially, grossly exaggerates the “facts” and conveniently leaves out any counter narrative. For what purpose? Likely to further create divide so whichever party can claim a stronger base. It’s disgusting, unamerican, and an absurd disservice to justice. Thank you, Bari. It is indeed self evident that truth is more important than narrative.
Where's the story? Is this a layout foul up?
The story is in audio format as a podcast episode. You should be able to see a player below the Honestly banner.
Another example of press manipulation! It is so so depressing to think we cannot trust virtually anything we read or hear from the "media." It is laziness? Cowardice? Fear of not being invited to sit at the table with the cool kids at lunch? It is so refreshing to see that real investigative reporters still exist and we have platforms like this one to get factual information so we can form our own opinions. Thanks, Ben and Bari!
"When we don't follow the facts, we misunderstand reality. And that can have severe consequences." If only more journalists (and our leaders) subscribed to this, we'd be in better shape as a country. Thanks for putting such wisdom into words, Ben.
First reports of this cruel, sad crime against Matthew Shepard were said to be gender related. This initial finding fit the narrative, which was topmost on many minds, straight and gay at the time.
Once the facts were agreed upon. in a court of law, Shepard's death was found to be the result of a drug deal gone wrong.
It seems to me we, as a nation, should aspire to keeping drugs and sexual orientation off the law books.
In my opinion, inquiries into drugs that seem to be generally harmful though in other ways helpful and lifestyles that don't follow society's norms but are not harmful can be researched but not treated as forms of lawlessness. What we learn and what we do not know should be shared widely.
I think opinions and biases can be discussed widely as long as we keep in mind what is provable and what is not; and what is a subject for the law and what is not or shouldn't be.
Crimes like murder, coercion, scams, theft and others involving harm to persons or property are police issues.
As I see it, what we learn about controversial lifestyles and drugs that are appealing to some people but also potentially dangerous are issues for individuals, families, and the medical community to manage.
I’m not sure what the point of this is. A young man was tortured and beaten to death by sadists. It had something to do with drugs and his sexuality. The standard story based on evidence presented in court is that the victim was targeted because he was gay. An alternative interpretation from the standard one is offered in the podcast, but only partially explained. Exactly what happened is left to our imagination while most of the discussion veres to attacking the playwright who wrote about it. Astounding statements like the one intended to downplay the role of Russell (name?) in the murder plead that « all he did was tie Shepard down » and that he was afraid of his drugged friend Aaron who did all the torturing. Really? That doesn’t sound so bad to you? And if this was all about a drug deal, why did Shepard get in the vehicle with these two crazed guys? Are you implying that he deserved his fate since he was involved in drugs? The podcast left me with more questions than it answered, and I think it is a disservice to toss out a halfway explanation of such a tragic event as if you were making a « big reveal. » I’m disappointed in Bari Weiss who is usually better than this.
It was a brutal crime for which two men are serving life sentences without the possibility of parole. The point is the TRUTH! This crime had nothing to do with the victim's sexuality and everything to do with the scourge of crystal meth drug addiction. The fact that the truth was swept under the rug in favor of a false narrative that served someone else's agenda meant that the focus that should have been on the REAL story of drug addiciton was lost. How many lives could have been saved in the past two decades if the that focus had not been lost? And Shepard got in the vehicle because he KNEW his attackers and certainly did not expect this to happen. Did you actually listen to the podcast?
Literally no one is arguing that the murder wasn't "so bad". This is about revealing the truth behind the events, and yet another case of the media getting basic facts wrong, and in a way that sows division in this country. Did you hear the part where Ben Kawaller said that, as a gay teen, the original narrative made him fear the US outside of NYC? I mean, you can draw a pretty straight line between the way the false narrative around Shepard's death was promulgated and Hillary Clinton's "basket of deplorables" quote and the coastal disdain for "fly-over country". Obviously what happened to Shepard was horrific, but it was a murder connected to other criminal activity, not some unique watershed hate crime. This type of crime happens all too often in this country, but most victims do not get appropriated to further a narrative that is false and creates a cottage industry of umbrage and angst and, worst of all, misunderstanding about certain parts of the country and the folks that inhabit them. I wish for one minute that the progressive folks who championed this as an example of the backwards, small-minded nature of rural America would step up and say, "yes, we got this wrong".
Fascinating that progressive activists are willing to muddy the waters of the truth for their heroes/tribunes, but are not willing to extend that courtesy to mythologized representations of Washington, Jefferson, etc. Turns out everyone is a hypocrite, as always.
Wait...are you trying to tell me this is "news???" This has been known for years...it was a drug deal gone VERY bad, by two guys who knew him.
Informed people have known for years that Kitty Genovese was NOT murdered while "thirty eight people watched and did nothing"...but people still talk about that one (e.g. Bill Clinton) as if it were true, and an established part of American History.
If it fits the narrative...it does not matter if it is true.
So sad but so true.
I love Ben Kawaller’s work. I knew of The Book of Matt though did not read it all, I recall the controversy when it came out, and believe few people are aware that Matthew Shephard’s brutal killing probably was not the anti-gay hate crime as portrayed by the media and his family and so-called friends. Therefore, very little of the factual discussion here surprised me. I say all that to preface and “contextualize” my comment that the most shocking part of the podcast to me was Ben’s interview of the man that comes at about the 45 min mark, when this interviewee seems to feel there is nothing to gain by knowing the truth, and that the truth might hurt people’s feelings so Ben and anyone seeking the truth should “read the room” and shut up. I guess I shouldn’t be shocked by this anymore. That people say it out loud and unashamedly should be shocking, but I guess even that is commonplace now. If this is what passes for ‘critical thinking’ these days, we’re so far gone…And that Henderson was treated as he was by the justice system is indeed unjust.
Holy shit.