…[A]fter BYU concluded an investigation in which more than 50 witnesses were reportedly interviewed (in addition to all the video and audio evidence), it could not corroborate the allegation—at all. The banned fan, described by one witness as “mentally challenged,” received an apology from the university and his ban was lifted. Sadly, and unsurprisingly, news of the investigation’s conclusion has received far less coverage.

But this is far from the only example of the media running with a story where horrific allegations are made, without doing the minimal amount of vetting.

One can look at the Duke Lacrosse scandal, the Jussie Smollett hate crime hoax, and the botched Covington Catholic story (to cite just a few examples) as demonstrations of the mainstream media’s tendency to believe (and advance) narratives that comport with their assumptions about the good guys and the bad guys.

Despite the embarrassing results, there is little reason to believe that anyone will be chastened for not doing basic journalism. Rather than contemplating why these mistakes keep being made, on Friday, The Washington Post wrote a piece explaining how BYU’s history of racism explains why the story went viral. Amazing.

Whatever happened to talking to sources and tracking down the video? How about expressing a healthy skepticism of any source that makes an explosive allegation? Why did a conservative student newspaper do the rudimentary reporting that scores of professional journalists chose not to?