Hasan Minhaj and how to actually clear your name publicly

[Consept]

We've seen a lot of stories come up over the last few months, Russel Brand, Tate etc whereby these names have been accused of something and put through a media trial as well as a criminal one. Hasan Minhaj was put through a story by the New Yorker (ref - https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-communications/hasan-minhajs-emotional-truths) in which he was accused of lying about his stand up. This wouldnt be a big deal normally but he was trying to highlight specific incidents of racism that hes experienced and because of his delivery it at least seemed like he was being truthful. The negative backlash is because this could be seen as falsely stoking the fires of racism. 

Now i dont particularly like Minhaj, i feel his persona comes across as a bit overly moral and sometimes condescending, but his response i thought was amazing and was straight to the point with receipts and it actually showed what some publications are willing to do to have a breaking story (response below). I dont think anyone can watch that and not understand where hes coming from. The New Yorker couldve shown the full context but chose not to for the sensationalism of the story. 

If you compare Minhaj's response to say Brand and Tate, you can see stark differences. Granted their incidents are a lot more serious but with both of them, they didnt address what happened directly, they didnt show their evidence to give it full context and they didnt truthfully say what happened. For example Minhaj apologises for not being 100% transparent whilst also showing what the New Yorker left out. There was no apology from Tate and Brand it was just outright denial. So this is a good benchmark when trying to work out what might be true or not and i think transparency is key. 

Anyway let me know your thoughts