When both sides of the journalistic aisle simultaneously do a double-take, that’s when you know something bad really happened.

Back in November, Rolling Stone published a story entitled “A Rape On Campus,” where writer Sabrina Rubin Erdely detailed the story of “Jackie,” a college student who recounted her terrifying ordeal of having been raped at a fraternity party during her freshman year. However, once the story was published, the basic details of the story – which Rolling Stone claimed to have fact-checked extensively – began to be called into question. Slate, the Washington Post, the Atlantic – all liberal news organizations – were poking holes and asking questions that seemed glaringly obvious for both Rolling Stone and Erdely. And there were no answers that made any sense except the obvious: that Erdely had gone looking for the most sensational story that she could find about campus rape, and that Rolling Stone was quite willing to publish it.

The holes became so large that after the initial backlash against the fraternity in question, Phi Kappa Psi – which was suspended by UVA president Teresa Sullivan with great fanfare – Rolling Stone was forced to issue a retraction on its original story. Phi Kappa Psi was then quietly reinstated by Sullivan last January. The Charlottesville police department announced that it had found no evidence to support the story last month, and they would be suspending the investigation.

And now, the final nail in the coffin has arrived. Rolling Stone asked the Columbia School of Journalism to run an in-depth review of how this story managed to make it past all their vaunted layers of editing and fact-checking. The report, now published online by Rolling Stone, is quite long, but worth reading to just see the anatomy of just how much Rolling Stone and Erdely had invested in making this piece happen.